Which is why I've always said that if the SEC needed another TX school then it should be TCU or SMU. Location, location, location. The physical presence in Dallas is far more important to the SEC for market control since the Dallas/FW media will jump on the SEC bandwagon when it's teams are coming to town, eating in their restaurants, drinking in their bars and staying in their hotels.

(08-02-2016 09:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 01:52 PM)XLance Wrote:  The biggest questions that remain:

Does Oklahoma move with Oklahoma State to the SEC.
Does West Virginia end up in the SEC or the ACC
In order to make room does the SEC give up Missouri to the B1G

If you can successfully answer those three questions, you can solve the realignment riddle.

Does Oklahoma move with Oklahoma State to the SEC? If the move at all, yes.
Does West Virginia end up in the SEC? No. ACC? If they move anywhere, yes.

In order to make room does the SEC give up Missouri to the B1G? The SEC doesn't give up anyone. Now if Missouri desires the Big 10 then we won't mind if the door hits them in rear on the way out. But there is no third team (outside of Texas) that would merit making room unless North Carolina or Virginia Tech wanted in. We sure won't be giving up Missouri to make room for W.V.U..

But it may all be moot if the morons in the Big 12 have their way and add 4 G5 schools and sign a GOR extension. It's hard to stop something bent on suicide.

That would kill all of the 4x16 and conference champ only playoff fantasies for quite a long time (2036?)

(08-03-2016 06:44 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 09:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 01:52 PM)XLance Wrote:  The biggest questions that remain:

Does Oklahoma move with Oklahoma State to the SEC.
Does West Virginia end up in the SEC or the ACC
In order to make room does the SEC give up Missouri to the B1G

If you can successfully answer those three questions, you can solve the realignment riddle.

Does Oklahoma move with Oklahoma State to the SEC? If the move at all, yes.
Does West Virginia end up in the SEC? No. ACC? If they move anywhere, yes.

In order to make room does the SEC give up Missouri to the B1G? The SEC doesn't give up anyone. Now if Missouri desires the Big 10 then we won't mind if the door hits them in rear on the way out. But there is no third team (outside of Texas) that would merit making room unless North Carolina or Virginia Tech wanted in. We sure won't be giving up Missouri to make room for W.V.U..

But it may all be moot if the morons in the Big 12 have their way and add 4 G5 schools and sign a GOR extension. It's hard to stop something bent on suicide.

That would kill all of the 4x16 and conference champ only playoff fantasies for quite a long time (2036?)

The 4 x 16 was always transient in nature. The number of schools playing big time football just goes down from here. The next time around if it is in 2036 it could easily be consolidation to a 3 x 20 or even a 3 x 18. Why?

There is a disconnect with the next generation most of whom have not grown up playing the game. Our generation loves it because in our youth it was part of our culture. It's too expensive for poor kids to play. It's too expensive for poor schools to fund. And the wealthy kids' parents steer them clear of it now. So Terry D. the pool of experienced players is shrinking and it will take longer for it to fully impact the Southeast and Southwest than it has in the more affluent East Coast and West Coast regions, or in the upper Midwest, but it's coming.

I may not live to see its complete demise, but as resources become more scarce, and they are, cheaper and more participated in sports will become the touchstones to their childhood for the adults of tomorrow.

If the expense can be controlled there is room for a rebirth of baseball. It is the most injury free of all of the money sports. The problem is the equipment. IMO that's why soccer is cheap by comparison, but then it has issues with concussions and lots of orthopedic issues. I'd say it would not be unlikely in 40 years to only have 36 to 40 schools still playing big time football. It's just not likely that I'll live to see it.

(08-03-2016 07:24 AM)JRsec Wrote:  If the expense can be controlled there is room for a rebirth of baseball. It is the most injury free of all of the money sports. The problem is the equipment. IMO that's why soccer is cheap by comparison, but then it has issues with concussions and lots of orthopedic issues. I'd say it would not be unlikely in 40 years to only have 36 to 40 schools still playing big time football. It's just not likely that I'll live to see it.

I've never bought this argument about baseball. My parents grew up in the projects playing stickball and I know they there's little resources in the DR yet they still find a way to love the game.

(08-03-2016 09:35 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 07:24 AM)JRsec Wrote:  If the expense can be controlled there is room for a rebirth of baseball. It is the most injury free of all of the money sports. The problem is the equipment. IMO that's why soccer is cheap by comparison, but then it has issues with concussions and lots of orthopedic issues. I'd say it would not be unlikely in 40 years to only have 36 to 40 schools still playing big time football. It's just not likely that I'll live to see it.

I've never bought this argument about baseball. My parents grew up in the projects playing stickball and I know they there's little resources in the DR yet they still find a way to love the game.

The expense comes in with league play. First baseman's mitt: $60-70. Catcher's mitt: $70-100. Basic glove: $45 & up. Catchers equipment: $200 & up. So I'll give everyone the benefit of procuring the cleats and count the jersey's and caps to corporate sponsorship. So unless you play catcher or first base then yeah it's not too bad. Great game, I still love it!
My problem now is that I can track the ball to within a foot and a half of my glove. I need bifocals.

(08-02-2016 09:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 01:52 PM)XLance Wrote:  The biggest questions that remain:

Does Oklahoma move with Oklahoma State to the SEC.
Does West Virginia end up in the SEC or the ACC
In order to make room does the SEC give up Missouri to the B1G

If you can successfully answer those three questions, you can solve the realignment riddle.

Does Oklahoma move with Oklahoma State to the SEC? If the move at all, yes.
Does West Virginia end up in the SEC? No. ACC? If they move anywhere, yes.

In order to make room does the SEC give up Missouri to the B1G? The SEC doesn't give up anyone. Now if Missouri desires the Big 10 then we won't mind if the door hits them in rear on the way out. But there is no third team (outside of Texas) that would merit making room unless North Carolina or Virginia Tech wanted in. We sure won't be giving up Missouri to make room for W.V.U..

But it may all be moot if the morons in the Big 12 have their way and add 4 G5 schools and sign a GOR extension. It's hard to stop something bent on suicide.

Do you know how much fun it is to just watch this round of expansion, knowing that my school was already on the ship when it sailed out to sea?

(08-03-2016 02:03 PM)megadrone Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 09:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-02-2016 01:52 PM)XLance Wrote:  The biggest questions that remain:

Does Oklahoma move with Oklahoma State to the SEC.
Does West Virginia end up in the SEC or the ACC
In order to make room does the SEC give up Missouri to the B1G

If you can successfully answer those three questions, you can solve the realignment riddle.

Does Oklahoma move with Oklahoma State to the SEC? If the move at all, yes.
Does West Virginia end up in the SEC? No. ACC? If they move anywhere, yes.

In order to make room does the SEC give up Missouri to the B1G? The SEC doesn't give up anyone. Now if Missouri desires the Big 10 then we won't mind if the door hits them in rear on the way out. But there is no third team (outside of Texas) that would merit making room unless North Carolina or Virginia Tech wanted in. We sure won't be giving up Missouri to make room for W.V.U..

But it may all be moot if the morons in the Big 12 have their way and add 4 G5 schools and sign a GOR extension. It's hard to stop something bent on suicide.

Do you know how much fun it is to just watch this round of expansion, knowing that my school was already on the ship when it sailed out to sea?

I can imagine it was quite a bit of relief and fun at the same time. It's been fun knowing that as members of the SEC (same for the Big 10) that our lives were stable in the first couple of rounds.

Realignment is truly best enjoyed as a spectator event!

(08-02-2016 11:30 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Which is why I've always said that if the SEC needed another TX school then it should be TCU or SMU. Location, location, location. The physical presence in Dallas is far more important to the SEC for market control since the Dallas/FW media will jump on the SEC bandwagon when it's teams are coming to town, eating in their restaurants, drinking in their bars and staying in their hotels.

I completely agree with that. I am definitely a TCU proponent.

Andy Staples on some of the tactics that the networks might try to use to rebuff the Big 12's plans.


http://www.campusrush.com/big-12-expansi...15979.html

(08-04-2016 12:06 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Andy Staples on some of the tactics that the networks might try to use to rebuff the Big 12's plans.


http://www.campusrush.com/big-12-expansi...15979.html

Yeah, I disagree with the gist of what has been said about this on the main board. If ESPN and FOX don't agree then realignment for the Big 12 still won't happen. Both networks have to share the cost so it only takes one to stop it.

I don't blame the networks either.

One poster on another board was saying that the networks want to include the G5. I don't buy that for a minute. If they did they would be paying the AAC, the best of the G5 conferences, less than 3 million a year per school for their product. There is a clear and obvious movement toward a more consolidated P grouping, not more golden tickets for the others.

I'm not being unkind either, that's just the way it is.

A P4 of 56 or 60 is just as likely as one of 65 or 64.

(08-03-2016 01:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 09:35 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 07:24 AM)JRsec Wrote:  If the expense can be controlled there is room for a rebirth of baseball. It is the most injury free of all of the money sports. The problem is the equipment. IMO that's why soccer is cheap by comparison, but then it has issues with concussions and lots of orthopedic issues. I'd say it would not be unlikely in 40 years to only have 36 to 40 schools still playing big time football. It's just not likely that I'll live to see it.

I've never bought this argument about baseball. My parents grew up in the projects playing stickball and I know they there's little resources in the DR yet they still find a way to love the game.

The expense comes in with league play. First baseman's mitt: $60-70. Catcher's mitt: $70-100. Basic glove: $45 & up. Catchers equipment: $200 & up. So I'll give everyone the benefit of procuring the cleats and count the jersey's and caps to corporate sponsorship. So unless you play catcher or first base then yeah it's not too bad. Great game, I still love it!
My problem now is that I can track the ball to within a foot and a half of my glove. I need bifocals.

Well I wore the tools of ignorance, so I can still see the ball. I could probably even get into a catcher's squat. It's the getting back up again that I'd worry about.