Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Realignment Conpsiracy Theory: OK State
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
XLance Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,012
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 156
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Realignment Conpsiracy Theory: OK State
(08-28-2017 12:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-28-2017 11:36 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  
(08-27-2017 08:48 PM)XLance Wrote:  You had better hope 15 is the number.
Kansas to the B1G.
Oklahoma to the SEC
Texas, TCU, and Texas Tech to the PAC
Notre Dame to the ACC

Everybody else heads to the American.

It seems to me (and I could be wrong), that the general consensus is that texas will wind up either in the SEC or the ACC? If that's the case, PAC might take Tech, TCU and Houston in a 15 team scenario.

That is possible. But, I'm still not sure the moves will be to 15. It would be the most efficient number with which to expand, but it is also probably the stickiest. There are too many ties that would have to be severed.

OK, then:
Kansas and Missouri to the B1G
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, West Virginia/Baylor to the SEC
Texas, TCU, Texas Tech, Rice/Houston to the PAC
Notre Dame, Cincinnati/UConn/West Virginia to the ACC
There are your moves to 16
08-29-2017 12:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,890
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 700
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #22
RE: Realignment Conpsiracy Theory: OK State
(08-29-2017 12:29 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(08-28-2017 12:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-28-2017 11:36 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  
(08-27-2017 08:48 PM)XLance Wrote:  You had better hope 15 is the number.
Kansas to the B1G.
Oklahoma to the SEC
Texas, TCU, and Texas Tech to the PAC
Notre Dame to the ACC

Everybody else heads to the American.

It seems to me (and I could be wrong), that the general consensus is that texas will wind up either in the SEC or the ACC? If that's the case, PAC might take Tech, TCU and Houston in a 15 team scenario.

That is possible. But, I'm still not sure the moves will be to 15. It would be the most efficient number with which to expand, but it is also probably the stickiest. There are too many ties that would have to be severed.

OK, then:
Kansas and Missouri to the B1G
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, West Virginia/Baylor to the SEC
Texas, TCU, Texas Tech, Rice/Houston to the PAC
Notre Dame, Cincinnati/UConn/West Virginia to the ACC
There are your moves to 16

Too Conventional:
The PAC doesn't expand. Why? Because they don't care about expansion and aren't football crazy. In fact they aren't sports crazy, just politically crazy.

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to the SEC. Why? They are football crazy and identify more with the South.

The Big 10 adds Kansas pushes for Virginia Tech and settles for Connecticut. Why? Because they still want to pursue the Northeast if it kills them.

The ACC adds Cincinnati and West Virginia as full members and N.D. remains a partial. Why? You need new markets for the network and you will still be sucking up to N.D. at the end of the day.

T.C.U., Baylor, Kansas State and Iowa State join the AAC. Why? Because they nowhere else to go!

ESPN gets everything they care to own and that winds it up for quite sometime to come.
08-29-2017 12:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,012
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 156
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Realignment Conpsiracy Theory: OK State
(08-29-2017 12:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-29-2017 12:29 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(08-28-2017 12:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-28-2017 11:36 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  
(08-27-2017 08:48 PM)XLance Wrote:  You had better hope 15 is the number.
Kansas to the B1G.
Oklahoma to the SEC
Texas, TCU, and Texas Tech to the PAC
Notre Dame to the ACC

Everybody else heads to the American.

It seems to me (and I could be wrong), that the general consensus is that texas will wind up either in the SEC or the ACC? If that's the case, PAC might take Tech, TCU and Houston in a 15 team scenario.

That is possible. But, I'm still not sure the moves will be to 15. It would be the most efficient number with which to expand, but it is also probably the stickiest. There are too many ties that would have to be severed.

OK, then:
Kansas and Missouri to the B1G
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, West Virginia/Baylor to the SEC
Texas, TCU, Texas Tech, Rice/Houston to the PAC
Notre Dame, Cincinnati/UConn/West Virginia to the ACC
There are your moves to 16

Too Conventional:
The PAC doesn't expand. Why? Because they don't care about expansion and aren't football crazy. In fact they aren't sports crazy, just politically crazy.

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to the SEC. Why? They are football crazy and identify more with the South.

The Big 10 adds Kansas pushes for Virginia Tech and settles for Connecticut. Why? Because they still want to pursue the Northeast if it kills them.

The ACC adds Cincinnati and West Virginia as full members and N.D. remains a partial. Why? You need new markets for the network and you will still be sucking up to N.D. at the end of the day.

T.C.U., Baylor, Kansas State and Iowa State join the AAC. Why? Because they nowhere else to go!

ESPN gets everything they care to own and that winds it up for quite sometime to come.

http://www.ocregister.com/2009/07/02/han...nd-future/
Q. In 1990, Arkansas jumped from the Southwest Conference to the SEC. That same year the ACC expanded and the Pac-10 took a look at adding Texas and Texas A&M. How close did the Texas schools come to joining the Pac-10?

A.It’s been a long time and memories do tricks to you but Texas was in my opinion based on communications, Texas was very interested and it thought initially might be able to come alone. Then about the time things were really getting serious it was made clear to us by Texas-Austin that it couldn’t get clear of A&M. We invited A&M but before we got a clear signal from A&M, Ann Richards who was then the governor said Baylor’s my alma mater and they’re going wherever Texas and Texas A&M go and then in a less clear message, but still pretty well defined, we were told the legislators who control the oil money that goes to the Texas universities was controlled either by alumni of or representatives of the area of Texas Tech and now there was a group of four and we were not interested in going from 10 to 14 so we said ‘thank you anyway.’ But Texas alone was very favorably inclined to consider our offer.
08-29-2017 01:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 507
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 29
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Realignment Conpsiracy Theory: OK State
(08-29-2017 12:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Too Conventional:
The PAC doesn't expand. Why? Because they don't care about expansion and aren't football crazy. In fact they aren't sports crazy, just politically crazy.

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to the SEC. Why? They are football crazy and identify more with the South.

The Big 10 adds Kansas pushes for Virginia Tech and settles for Connecticut. Why? Because they still want to pursue the Northeast if it kills them.

The ACC adds Cincinnati and West Virginia as full members and N.D. remains a partial. Why? You need new markets for the network and you will still be sucking up to N.D. at the end of the day.

T.C.U., Baylor, Kansas State and Iowa State join the AAC. Why? Because they nowhere else to go!

ESPN gets everything they care to own and that winds it up for quite sometime to come.

This is boring like when you watch a show after seeing a spoiler lol

This is probably exactly the way it'll be. The SEC will offer big money (the biggest of all) to the two XII gems, little brothers included. The PAC has no real players for expansion that they seem to like. The B1G will take Kansas and Connecticut. The ACC will never get Notre Dame to go all in without the CFP committee essentially saying it must or no championship - so Cincinnati and West Virginia find a home there.

I can easily see Iowa St and Kansas St heading to the AAC but I wouldn't be surprised if TCU and Baylor headed to the MWC. Although, the AAC would likely be a bit more attractive even without Cincinnati and Connecticut.

PAC - same

B1G
West: Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue
East: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Penn St, Maryland, Rutgers, Connecticut

SEC
West: Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Missouri
Central: Arkansas, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn
East: Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina

ACC
Atlantic: Boston College, Cincinnati, Clemson, Florida St, Louisville, North Carolina St, Syracuse, Wake Forest
Coastal: Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
*Notre Dame partial*

AAC (zipper model - across from annual rival)
Blue: Iowa St, TCU, Baylor, Tulane, Central Florida, Memphis, Temple
Red: Kansas St, SMU, Houston, Tulsa, South Florida, East Carolina, Navy
08-29-2017 01:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,890
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 700
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Realignment Conpsiracy Theory: OK State
(08-29-2017 01:17 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(08-29-2017 12:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-29-2017 12:29 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(08-28-2017 12:28 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-28-2017 11:36 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  It seems to me (and I could be wrong), that the general consensus is that texas will wind up either in the SEC or the ACC? If that's the case, PAC might take Tech, TCU and Houston in a 15 team scenario.

That is possible. But, I'm still not sure the moves will be to 15. It would be the most efficient number with which to expand, but it is also probably the stickiest. There are too many ties that would have to be severed.

OK, then:
Kansas and Missouri to the B1G
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, West Virginia/Baylor to the SEC
Texas, TCU, Texas Tech, Rice/Houston to the PAC
Notre Dame, Cincinnati/UConn/West Virginia to the ACC
There are your moves to 16

Too Conventional:
The PAC doesn't expand. Why? Because they don't care about expansion and aren't football crazy. In fact they aren't sports crazy, just politically crazy.

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to the SEC. Why? They are football crazy and identify more with the South.

The Big 10 adds Kansas pushes for Virginia Tech and settles for Connecticut. Why? Because they still want to pursue the Northeast if it kills them.

The ACC adds Cincinnati and West Virginia as full members and N.D. remains a partial. Why? You need new markets for the network and you will still be sucking up to N.D. at the end of the day.

T.C.U., Baylor, Kansas State and Iowa State join the AAC. Why? Because they nowhere else to go!

ESPN gets everything they care to own and that winds it up for quite sometime to come.

http://www.ocregister.com/2009/07/02/han...nd-future/
Q. In 1990, Arkansas jumped from the Southwest Conference to the SEC. That same year the ACC expanded and the Pac-10 took a look at adding Texas and Texas A&M. How close did the Texas schools come to joining the Pac-10?

A.It’s been a long time and memories do tricks to you but Texas was in my opinion based on communications, Texas was very interested and it thought initially might be able to come alone. Then about the time things were really getting serious it was made clear to us by Texas-Austin that it couldn’t get clear of A&M. We invited A&M but before we got a clear signal from A&M, Ann Richards who was then the governor said Baylor’s my alma mater and they’re going wherever Texas and Texas A&M go and then in a less clear message, but still pretty well defined, we were told the legislators who control the oil money that goes to the Texas universities was controlled either by alumni of or representatives of the area of Texas Tech and now there was a group of four and we were not interested in going from 10 to 14 so we said ‘thank you anyway.’ But Texas alone was very favorably inclined to consider our offer.

Texas may be the cheese, but they refuse to stand alone. So if anybody wants the Lemberger they are going to have to take cheese crackers to get them.
08-29-2017 02:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,890
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 700
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Realignment Conpsiracy Theory: OK State
(08-29-2017 01:24 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(08-29-2017 12:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Too Conventional:
The PAC doesn't expand. Why? Because they don't care about expansion and aren't football crazy. In fact they aren't sports crazy, just politically crazy.

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to the SEC. Why? They are football crazy and identify more with the South.

The Big 10 adds Kansas pushes for Virginia Tech and settles for Connecticut. Why? Because they still want to pursue the Northeast if it kills them.

The ACC adds Cincinnati and West Virginia as full members and N.D. remains a partial. Why? You need new markets for the network and you will still be sucking up to N.D. at the end of the day.

T.C.U., Baylor, Kansas State and Iowa State join the AAC. Why? Because they nowhere else to go!

ESPN gets everything they care to own and that winds it up for quite sometime to come.

This is boring like when you watch a show after seeing a spoiler lol

This is probably exactly the way it'll be. The SEC will offer big money (the biggest of all) to the two XII gems, little brothers included. The PAC has no real players for expansion that they seem to like. The B1G will take Kansas and Connecticut. The ACC will never get Notre Dame to go all in without the CFP committee essentially saying it must or no championship - so Cincinnati and West Virginia find a home there.

I can easily see Iowa St and Kansas St heading to the AAC but I wouldn't be surprised if TCU and Baylor headed to the MWC. Although, the AAC would likely be a bit more attractive even without Cincinnati and Connecticut.

PAC - same

B1G
West: Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue
East: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Penn St, Maryland, Rutgers, Connecticut

SEC
West: Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Missouri
Central: Arkansas, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn
East: Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina

ACC
Atlantic: Boston College, Cincinnati, Clemson, Florida St, Louisville, North Carolina St, Syracuse, Wake Forest
Coastal: Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
*Notre Dame partial*

AAC (zipper model - across from annual rival)
Blue: Iowa St, TCU, Baylor, Tulane, Central Florida, Memphis, Temple
Red: Kansas St, SMU, Houston, Tulsa, South Florida, East Carolina, Navy

Uh, no. There are intricacies to the SEC that must be maintained. And then there is Arkansas that would love to be reunited with Texas and have Oklahoma to play.

So it would look like this:

Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Crossover rivals would have to be maintained.

If A&M was to ever stomach Texas they would need to be in a different division. L.S.U. is an old time rival of A&M. If this move happened these divisions would be needed to maintain the peace.
08-29-2017 02:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,783
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 71
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Realignment Conpsiracy Theory: OK State
I do think local politics will play a big role. It's a minor miracle A&M was able to escape UT the way they did. With that said, Baylor may be so poisoned that no one has to worry about them. I think TCU is another story though. I suppose they're not as influential as Baylor was in the old days, but they've still cultivated a relationship with UT and I'm sure they've spent time currying favor with politicians.

Oklahoma and Oklahoma State could easily move together, but I think the TX schools could have more trouble if one league isn't willing to take them all. I don't think it will be the PAC or B1G. I suppose the ACC might be willing to take the group, but I really don't know.

I'm not sure the SEC would them all either.
08-29-2017 03:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,890
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 700
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Realignment Conpsiracy Theory: OK State
(08-29-2017 03:36 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I do think local politics will play a big role. It's a minor miracle A&M was able to escape UT the way they did. With that said, Baylor may be so poisoned that no one has to worry about them. I think TCU is another story though. I suppose they're not as influential as Baylor was in the old days, but they've still cultivated a relationship with UT and I'm sure they've spent time currying favor with politicians.

Oklahoma and Oklahoma State could easily move together, but I think the TX schools could have more trouble if one league isn't willing to take them all. I don't think it will be the PAC or B1G. I suppose the ACC might be willing to take the group, but I really don't know.

I'm not sure the SEC would them all either.

At this juncture the Horns have been down so long I think their fans, and the politicians of the state would be fine if the only one they covered was Tech.

Part of Texas's problem was that they elevated the minor brands in Texas too much. Now if Texas is to regain some steam what they really need is to trim the number of P5 brands in the state. They will always be the darling over Tech, but A&M gained a brand advantage over them. If they joined the SEC with Oklahoma, or with the additions of Tech and OSU they really only have to compete with A&M and Oklahoma in state. Relegating T.C.U. and Baylor permits them more 4 star recruits and equals the branding with A&M.

So I wouldn't rule out Texas's positioning for strategic advantages in all of this.
08-29-2017 03:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Soobahk40050 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 480
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 34
I Root For: Tennessee
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Realignment Conpsiracy Theory: OK State
(08-29-2017 02:16 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-29-2017 01:24 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(08-29-2017 12:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Too Conventional:
The PAC doesn't expand. Why? Because they don't care about expansion and aren't football crazy. In fact they aren't sports crazy, just politically crazy.

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to the SEC. Why? They are football crazy and identify more with the South.

The Big 10 adds Kansas pushes for Virginia Tech and settles for Connecticut. Why? Because they still want to pursue the Northeast if it kills them.

The ACC adds Cincinnati and West Virginia as full members and N.D. remains a partial. Why? You need new markets for the network and you will still be sucking up to N.D. at the end of the day.

T.C.U., Baylor, Kansas State and Iowa State join the AAC. Why? Because they nowhere else to go!

ESPN gets everything they care to own and that winds it up for quite sometime to come.

This is boring like when you watch a show after seeing a spoiler lol

This is probably exactly the way it'll be. The SEC will offer big money (the biggest of all) to the two XII gems, little brothers included. The PAC has no real players for expansion that they seem to like. The B1G will take Kansas and Connecticut. The ACC will never get Notre Dame to go all in without the CFP committee essentially saying it must or no championship - so Cincinnati and West Virginia find a home there.

I can easily see Iowa St and Kansas St heading to the AAC but I wouldn't be surprised if TCU and Baylor headed to the MWC. Although, the AAC would likely be a bit more attractive even without Cincinnati and Connecticut.

PAC - same

B1G
West: Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue
East: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Penn St, Maryland, Rutgers, Connecticut

SEC
West: Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Missouri
Central: Arkansas, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn
East: Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina

ACC
Atlantic: Boston College, Cincinnati, Clemson, Florida St, Louisville, North Carolina St, Syracuse, Wake Forest
Coastal: Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
*Notre Dame partial*

AAC (zipper model - across from annual rival)
Blue: Iowa St, TCU, Baylor, Tulane, Central Florida, Memphis, Temple
Red: Kansas St, SMU, Houston, Tulsa, South Florida, East Carolina, Navy

Uh, no. There are intricacies to the SEC that must be maintained. And then there is Arkansas that would love to be reunited with Texas and have Oklahoma to play.

So it would look like this:

Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Crossover rivals would have to be maintained.

If A&M was to ever stomach Texas they would need to be in a different division. L.S.U. is an old time rival of A&M. If this move happened these divisions would be needed to maintain the peace.

If TN is to stomach this expansion, we still have to play Bama. Can't eliminate corssover rivals.
08-29-2017 05:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,890
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 700
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Realignment Conpsiracy Theory: OK State
(08-29-2017 05:08 PM)Soobahk40050 Wrote:  
(08-29-2017 02:16 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(08-29-2017 01:24 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(08-29-2017 12:58 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Too Conventional:
The PAC doesn't expand. Why? Because they don't care about expansion and aren't football crazy. In fact they aren't sports crazy, just politically crazy.

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to the SEC. Why? They are football crazy and identify more with the South.

The Big 10 adds Kansas pushes for Virginia Tech and settles for Connecticut. Why? Because they still want to pursue the Northeast if it kills them.

The ACC adds Cincinnati and West Virginia as full members and N.D. remains a partial. Why? You need new markets for the network and you will still be sucking up to N.D. at the end of the day.

T.C.U., Baylor, Kansas State and Iowa State join the AAC. Why? Because they nowhere else to go!

ESPN gets everything they care to own and that winds it up for quite sometime to come.

This is boring like when you watch a show after seeing a spoiler lol

This is probably exactly the way it'll be. The SEC will offer big money (the biggest of all) to the two XII gems, little brothers included. The PAC has no real players for expansion that they seem to like. The B1G will take Kansas and Connecticut. The ACC will never get Notre Dame to go all in without the CFP committee essentially saying it must or no championship - so Cincinnati and West Virginia find a home there.

I can easily see Iowa St and Kansas St heading to the AAC but I wouldn't be surprised if TCU and Baylor headed to the MWC. Although, the AAC would likely be a bit more attractive even without Cincinnati and Connecticut.

PAC - same

B1G
West: Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue
East: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Penn St, Maryland, Rutgers, Connecticut

SEC
West: Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Missouri
Central: Arkansas, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama, Auburn
East: Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina

ACC
Atlantic: Boston College, Cincinnati, Clemson, Florida St, Louisville, North Carolina St, Syracuse, Wake Forest
Coastal: Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
*Notre Dame partial*

AAC (zipper model - across from annual rival)
Blue: Iowa St, TCU, Baylor, Tulane, Central Florida, Memphis, Temple
Red: Kansas St, SMU, Houston, Tulsa, South Florida, East Carolina, Navy

Uh, no. There are intricacies to the SEC that must be maintained. And then there is Arkansas that would love to be reunited with Texas and have Oklahoma to play.

So it would look like this:

Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Crossover rivals would have to be maintained.

If A&M was to ever stomach Texas they would need to be in a different division. L.S.U. is an old time rival of A&M. If this move happened these divisions would be needed to maintain the peace.

If TN is to stomach this expansion, we still have to play Bama. Can't eliminate corssover rivals.
There's no doubt about it. Tennesee / Alabama has to be cross divisional so that Tennessee can keep Kentucky and Vanderbilt.

Auburn/Georiga has to be cross divisional so that Georgia can keep Tennessee and Florida.

A&M/Texas would have to be cross divisional so that that rivalry can be renewed.

And there are others.
08-29-2017 05:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2017 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.