CSNbbs

Full Version: If Alston Wins How Tiered Conferences Might Look and Why That Might Not Be So Bad
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
Alston could cause change in all P conferences. But I seriously doubt that schools like Northwestern, Vanderbilt, or Wake Forest would want to give up old affiliations. They have academic ties, and their branding is tied to their current conferences. But committing resources to fund a pay for play football would probably be untenable for them and more than a few other privates now in the upper tier.

Thankfully, Notre Dame has shown how a hybrid relationship might be workable. So what if your future upper tier looked something like this:

Big 10:

Maryland, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State

Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin

Iowa State, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma

*Northwestern all but football

Considerations for other partial members: *Connecticut all but football, *Butler all but football.


SEC:

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina

Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee

Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana State, Missouri

Texas, Texas A&M, T.C.U., Texas Tech

*Vanderbilt all but football

Other considerations for all but football: *Rice, *Tulane,


ACC:

Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse

Cincinnati, Louisville, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

Clemson, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia

Baylor, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami

*Wake Forest all but football,

Other considerations for all but football: *Tulane, *Members of the Catholic 7, *Connecticut


PAC:

Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State

California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern Cal, Stanford

Arizona, Arizona State, Nevada, Utah

Colorado, Houston, Oklahoma State, Kansas State

*Gonzaga all but football.

Other considerations for all but football: *Mount St. Mary's, *Pepperdine, *San Diego, *New Mexico State, *Nevada Las Vegas


If we moved toward having essentially two tiers within a conference:

1. Pay for play in Football, Basketbal, and Baseball.

2. Pay for play in Basketball and Baseball only with Football either having been dropped or operational at a scholarship only tier.

Under that format P4 conferences might be able to augment their basketball and baseball (or hockey) value without having to cut the participants in on an equal share of football revenue. Such a construction would help to accommodate strong basketball only schools into the overall conference value.

Thoughts?
1. If Alston goes the way we think it will then I think college basketball becomes more valuable. The richest leagues will be able to reclaim the tournament, and I think that will lend itself to a more profitable regular season as well. The dross will be cut off if nothing else so there should be more money flowing through the coffers of major programs.

2. On another note, I've always been intrigued by the idea of Rice and Tulane joining up simply because I think it could open up opportunities that aren't athletics related. No doubt that they wouldn't provide value to a TV contract, but perhaps the boost in perception might mean dollars in other spheres.

3. If we're looking at non-football additions then I would say go ahead and go to 20. A round robin schedule for basketball with 19 games would be very interesting, and I think it would make the conference tournament a little more intriguing as well. If we take Rice and Tulane then maybe SMU makes sense as the 4th non-football member. They've built a decent basketball program recently and I doubt football survives there. It would give us a presence in DFW without having to pay full price for TCU. Quite likely that the other TX schools wouldn't want a 4th football member from their state anyway.

4. If Vanderbilt drops down in football then I think that presents several interesting opportunities for a replacement.

- Let's assume for a moment that Texas and Texas Tech were the main components in an expansion. Let's also assume Oklahoma and Kansas are off to the Big Ten. We still need a 3rd football school at that point.

- Vanderbilt doesn't have the economic base to spend on football. A lot of the privates would be in the same boat. I wonder, however, if there wouldn't be some up and coming G5 publics that would be willing to make the investment. There might be a few of them worth taking a look at if we're making a straight trade on the football field for Vandy. I'm thinking in terms of South Florida or maybe Cincinnati. In other words, the sort of school that helps with market penetration.


So what if it looked like this?

Full members:

West: Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Arkansas, Missouri, LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi State

East: Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, South Florida

Non-football members:

Vanderbilt, Tulane, Rice, and SMU
(02-09-2019 11:45 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]1. If Alston goes the way we think it will then I think college basketball becomes more valuable. The richest leagues will be able to reclaim the tournament, and I think that will lend itself to a more profitable regular season as well. The dross will be cut off if nothing else so there should be more money flowing through the coffers of major programs.

2. On another note, I've always been intrigued by the idea of Rice and Tulane joining up simply because I think it could open up opportunities that aren't athletics related. No doubt that they wouldn't provide value to a TV contract, but perhaps the boost in perception might mean dollars in other spheres.

3. If we're looking at non-football additions then I would say go ahead and go to 20. A round robin schedule for basketball with 19 games would be very interesting, and I think it would make the conference tournament a little more intriguing as well. If we take Rice and Tulane then maybe SMU makes sense as the 4th non-football member. They've built a decent basketball program recently and I doubt football survives there. It would give us a presence in DFW without having to pay full price for TCU. Quite likely that the other TX schools wouldn't want a 4th football member from their state anyway.

4. If Vanderbilt drops down in football then I think that presents several interesting opportunities for a replacement.

- Let's assume for a moment that Texas and Texas Tech were the main components in an expansion. Let's also assume Oklahoma and Kansas are off to the Big Ten. We still need a 3rd football school at that point.

- Vanderbilt doesn't have the economic base to spend on football. A lot of the privates would be in the same boat. I wonder, however, if there wouldn't be some up and coming G5 publics that would be willing to make the investment. There might be a few of them worth taking a look at if we're making a straight trade on the football field for Vandy. I'm thinking in terms of South Florida or maybe Cincinnati. In other words, the sort of school that helps with market penetration.


So what if it looked like this?

Full members:

West: Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Arkansas, Missouri, LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi State

East: Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, South Florida

Non-football members:

Vanderbilt, Tulane, Rice, and SMU

ATU, all of the G5s are subsidized more than 25%. They aren't making the cut with Alston. B.Y.U. might be the only one that could with full inclusion for football. Since T.C.U. and Texas are closely tied and the new Texas A.D. is the old T.C.U. A.D. I included the Frogs. That puts the SEC in DFW.

Rice is in Houston. That's the appeal of the Owls.

So I think we would move to 16 using present P5 schools only, and we might look at Tulane and see a school that adds no markets and a small fan base. With T.C.U. we don't need S.M.U. either.

So I see 16 plus 2.
Replace Alston with the NIL lawvof California. It took us awhile to get there, but we are getting there, JR
(02-10-2019 12:30 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-09-2019 11:45 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]1. If Alston goes the way we think it will then I think college basketball becomes more valuable. The richest leagues will be able to reclaim the tournament, and I think that will lend itself to a more profitable regular season as well. The dross will be cut off if nothing else so there should be more money flowing through the coffers of major programs.

2. On another note, I've always been intrigued by the idea of Rice and Tulane joining up simply because I think it could open up opportunities that aren't athletics related. No doubt that they wouldn't provide value to a TV contract, but perhaps the boost in perception might mean dollars in other spheres.

3. If we're looking at non-football additions then I would say go ahead and go to 20. A round robin schedule for basketball with 19 games would be very interesting, and I think it would make the conference tournament a little more intriguing as well. If we take Rice and Tulane then maybe SMU makes sense as the 4th non-football member. They've built a decent basketball program recently and I doubt football survives there. It would give us a presence in DFW without having to pay full price for TCU. Quite likely that the other TX schools wouldn't want a 4th football member from their state anyway.

4. If Vanderbilt drops down in football then I think that presents several interesting opportunities for a replacement.

- Let's assume for a moment that Texas and Texas Tech were the main components in an expansion. Let's also assume Oklahoma and Kansas are off to the Big Ten. We still need a 3rd football school at that point.

- Vanderbilt doesn't have the economic base to spend on football. A lot of the privates would be in the same boat. I wonder, however, if there wouldn't be some up and coming G5 publics that would be willing to make the investment. There might be a few of them worth taking a look at if we're making a straight trade on the football field for Vandy. I'm thinking in terms of South Florida or maybe Cincinnati. In other words, the sort of school that helps with market penetration.


So what if it looked like this?

Full members:

West: Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Arkansas, Missouri, LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi State

East: Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, South Florida

Non-football members:

Vanderbilt, Tulane, Rice, and SMU

ATU, all of the G5s are subsidized more than 25%. They aren't making the cut with Alston. B.Y.U. might be the only one that could with full inclusion for football. Since T.C.U. and Texas are closely tied and the new Texas A.D. is the old T.C.U. A.D. I included the Frogs. That puts the SEC in DFW.

Rice is in Houston. That's the appeal of the Owls.

So I think we would move to 16 using present P5 schools only, and we might look at Tulane and see a school that adds no markets and a small fan base. With T.C.U. we don't need S.M.U. either.

So I see 16 plus 2.

A&M has much larger presence in Houston than U of H or Rice. At worst we would take Texas and Texas Tech as a pair. We’ll probably take a shot at Oklahoma and also offer the pokies to keep OU from wondering off to Big Ten land.

Wildcards if a spot opens up in the SEC and if the Big 12 (Texas and OU) stays together would be a Big 12 deflection like West Virginia or maybe Kansas if Mizzou pushes hard to get that rivalry back.
I have followed Vanderbilt sports since about 1970 and will admit this season's football team is a disaster. I also will acknowledge that in, say, 20 to 30 years years, VU could be a partial member of the SEC (or gone altogether). But VU and Nashville bring various elements to the table that are appealing and important to the SEC. And, yes, I admit I live in Nashville and am biased so maybe I'm a complete ignoramus who can't see the big picture. Anyway, when I see posts of this type, I sometime feel a need to weigh in.
(10-13-2019 08:10 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]I have followed Vanderbilt sports since about 1970 and will admit this season's football team is a disaster. I also will acknowledge that in, say, 20 to 30 years years, VU could be a partial member of the SEC (or gone altogether). But VU and Nashville bring various elements to the table that are appealing and important to the SEC. And, yes, I admit I live in Nashville and am biased so maybe I'm a complete ignoramus who can't see the big picture. Anyway, when I see posts of this type, I sometime feel a need to weigh in.

I don't think there is anyone here who doesn't appreciate Nashville being part of SEC country. But how would you suggest that Vanderbilt proceed. Will they expend the resources to stay up to speed in facilities and venues? Will they try to enhance attendance at events? Or will they continue to syphon off the SEC pay day to just stay afloat athletically?

VU has shown no propensity for, or desire to, try to remain relatively competitive in anything but baseball and women's bowling.
(10-13-2019 08:40 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 08:10 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]I have followed Vanderbilt sports since about 1970 and will admit this season's football team is a disaster. I also will acknowledge that in, say, 20 to 30 years years, VU could be a partial member of the SEC (or gone altogether). But VU and Nashville bring various elements to the table that are appealing and important to the SEC. And, yes, I admit I live in Nashville and am biased so maybe I'm a complete ignoramus who can't see the big picture. Anyway, when I see posts of this type, I sometime feel a need to weigh in.

I don't think there is anyone here who doesn't appreciate Nashville being part of SEC country. But how would you suggest that Vanderbilt proceed. Will they expend the resources to stay up to speed in facilities and venues? Will they try to enhance attendance at events? Or will they continue to syphon off the SEC pay day to just stay afloat athletically?

VU has shown no propensity for, or desire to, try to remain relatively competitive in anything but baseball and women's bowling.

VU has made every effort to stay competitive in men's and women's tennis and, to some extent, women's soccer. Admittedly, these are minor sports.

Now, for men's hoops ... maybe there is hope with JStackhouse. We don't know yet. The women's hoops situation is, admittedly, troubling.

Football. It is what it is.

So I don't fully agree with your point, but your point is worth pondering and you offer some validity. I understand.

What I would argue more broadly is that every P5 needs "a VU," i.e., a university that is so unlike (in academics, athletics, location, mission, student body (VU is 40 percent students of color), etc.) its intra-league bethren that it almost is oddly refreshing (at least if you're a Vandy fan).

As to how VU proceed (specifically in football), I could take weeks to offer my views but I'm not sure it would be helpful or productive. My great great aunt was one of the first women to attend the university (in the 1920s) and my father as a newborn almost died at what was the precursor to VUMC in 1931. I have had no fewer than 10 close family members attend or work at the university since then (my brother has taught at VU the past 11 years, and my nephew attends currently). I once worked there part-time for three years. I am so, almost militantly, biased, that to ask me that question might not yield a fair answer.

Suffice to say, JRSec, your question is very valid and it is very difficult (for, to an extent, personal and emotional reasons) for me to answer. It is also difficult because, quite frankly, VU has been very bad the last few years in the two sports that count the most.

Thanks for your question and understanding.
(10-13-2019 09:38 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 08:40 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 08:10 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]I have followed Vanderbilt sports since about 1970 and will admit this season's football team is a disaster. I also will acknowledge that in, say, 20 to 30 years years, VU could be a partial member of the SEC (or gone altogether). But VU and Nashville bring various elements to the table that are appealing and important to the SEC. And, yes, I admit I live in Nashville and am biased so maybe I'm a complete ignoramus who can't see the big picture. Anyway, when I see posts of this type, I sometime feel a need to weigh in.

I don't think there is anyone here who doesn't appreciate Nashville being part of SEC country. But how would you suggest that Vanderbilt proceed. Will they expend the resources to stay up to speed in facilities and venues? Will they try to enhance attendance at events? Or will they continue to syphon off the SEC pay day to just stay afloat athletically?

VU has shown no propensity for, or desire to, try to remain relatively competitive in anything but baseball and women's bowling.

VU has made every effort to stay competitive in men's and women's tennis and, to some extent, women's soccer. Admittedly, these are minor sports.

Now, for men's hoops ... maybe there is hope with JStackhouse. We don't know yet. The women's hoops situation is, admittedly, troubling.

So I don't fully agree with your point, but your point is worth pondering. I understand.

What I would argue more broadly is that every P5 needs "a VU," i.e., a university that is so unlike (in academics, athletics, location, mission, student body (VU is 40 percent students of color), etc.) its intra-league bethren that it almost is oddly refreshing (at least if you're a Vandy fan).

As to how VU proceed (specifically in football), I could take weeks to offer my views but I'm not sure it would be helpful or productive. My great great aunt was one of the first women to attend the university (in the 1920s) and my father as a newborn almost died at what was the precursor to VUMC in 1931. I have had no fewer than 10 close family members attend or work at the university since then (my brother has taught at VU the past 11 years, and my nephew attends currently). I once worked there part-time for three years. I am so, almost militantly, biased, that to ask me that question might not yield a fair answer.

Suffice to say, JRSec, your question is very valid and it is very difficult (for, to an extent, personal and emotional reasons) for me to answer. It is also difficult because, quite frankly, VU has been very bad the last few years in the two sports that count the most.

Thanks for your question and understanding.

My understanding is this:
1. The SEC has never asked a school to leave, nor will it.
2. Vanderbilt is a nice academic bell cow for the SEC.
3. Vanderbilt has done nothing to offer modern amenities required now at other SEC venues. They always claim space is the problem for improvement of the football and baseball facilities. I'm not sure that I buy that the basketball venue needs upgrading. It seems to me many of our so called upgrades in hoops actually cheapened the experience and crowded fewer seats into smaller venues in an uncomfortable way.

So my quandary is between these extremes. Historically Vandy's place is secured. But good grief it costs so little to make even a small stadium more comfortable and modernized. Your fans take advantage of that everywhere in the conference, but we can't in Nashville. Vandy is well endowed. There is no reason for this. And therein lies the rub.

Paying for yourselves is one issue, but failing to meet conference standards for the sake of the fans is another. Tulane with much less is doing much better.

And making one other point of importance. Keeping Vanderbilt instead of replacing them with a more competitive school costs each other member of the SEC ~ 3 million per year per each. We'd have no problem filling that slot. I sometimes believe the Vanderbilt administration doesn't take that dynamic seriously enough.
(10-13-2019 09:54 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 09:38 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 08:40 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 08:10 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]I have followed Vanderbilt sports since about 1970 and will admit this season's football team is a disaster. I also will acknowledge that in, say, 20 to 30 years years, VU could be a partial member of the SEC (or gone altogether). But VU and Nashville bring various elements to the table that are appealing and important to the SEC. And, yes, I admit I live in Nashville and am biased so maybe I'm a complete ignoramus who can't see the big picture. Anyway, when I see posts of this type, I sometime feel a need to weigh in.

I don't think there is anyone here who doesn't appreciate Nashville being part of SEC country. But how would you suggest that Vanderbilt proceed. Will they expend the resources to stay up to speed in facilities and venues? Will they try to enhance attendance at events? Or will they continue to syphon off the SEC pay day to just stay afloat athletically?

VU has shown no propensity for, or desire to, try to remain relatively competitive in anything but baseball and women's bowling.

VU has made every effort to stay competitive in men's and women's tennis and, to some extent, women's soccer. Admittedly, these are minor sports.

Now, for men's hoops ... maybe there is hope with JStackhouse. We don't know yet. The women's hoops situation is, admittedly, troubling.

So I don't fully agree with your point, but your point is worth pondering. I understand.

What I would argue more broadly is that every P5 needs "a VU," i.e., a university that is so unlike (in academics, athletics, location, mission, student body (VU is 40 percent students of color), etc.) its intra-league bethren that it almost is oddly refreshing (at least if you're a Vandy fan).

As to how VU proceed (specifically in football), I could take weeks to offer my views but I'm not sure it would be helpful or productive. My great great aunt was one of the first women to attend the university (in the 1920s) and my father as a newborn almost died at what was the precursor to VUMC in 1931. I have had no fewer than 10 close family members attend or work at the university since then (my brother has taught at VU the past 11 years, and my nephew attends currently). I once worked there part-time for three years. I am so, almost militantly, biased, that to ask me that question might not yield a fair answer.

Suffice to say, JRSec, your question is very valid and it is very difficult (for, to an extent, personal and emotional reasons) for me to answer. It is also difficult because, quite frankly, VU has been very bad the last few years in the two sports that count the most.

Thanks for your question and understanding.

My understanding is this:
1. The SEC has never asked a school to leave, nor will it.
2. Vanderbilt is a nice academic bell cow for the SEC.
3. Vanderbilt has done nothing to offer modern amenities required now at other SEC venues. They always claim space is the problem for improvement of the football and baseball facilities. I'm not sure that I buy that the basketball venue needs upgrading. It seems to me many of our so called upgrades in hoops actually cheapened the experience and crowded fewer seats into smaller venues in an uncomfortable way.

So my quandary is between these extremes. Historically Vandy's place is secured. But good grief it costs so little to make even a small stadium more comfortable and modernized. Your fans take advantage of that everywhere in the conference, but we can't in Nashville. Vandy is well endowed. There is no reason for this. And therein lies the rub.

Paying for yourselves is one issue, but failing to meet conference standards for the sake of the fans is another. Tulane with much less is doing much better.

And making one other point of importance. Keeping Vanderbilt instead of replacing them with a more competitive school costs each other member of the SEC ~ 3 million per year per each. We'd have no problem filling that slot. I sometimes believe the Vanderbilt administration doesn't take that dynamic seriously enough.


Agree with you on Tulane. That university has done a fine job with upgrading its athletics (facilities, coaches, etc.).

I do feel VU has done a strong job with Hawkins Field upgrades.

As to your "I sometimes believe the Vanderbilt administration doesn't take that dynamic seriously enough" comment ... yes, I can respectfully see some validity to that criticism. This is where I hope Malcolm Turner has a positive impact.

One of the things that makes VU's three major facilities (Vanderbilt Stadium, Hawkins Field and Memorial Gymnasium) "special" (and as a homer I know some will laugh at my use of that word) is the orientation of three in relation to each other. They "hug" themselves and, to an extent, the adjacent Marriott hotel building and the 2525 Building. For urban placemaking enthusiasts such as myself, that is a special configuration that does not need to tampered with.

So (and I'll make this brief) ... take the existing football stadium and overhaul it. Remove most of the bleacher seats to add chair backs, perhaps eliminate seating in the south endzone (like Memphis did, and nicely so, with the Liberty Bowl) and "dress" the exterior with, for example, a neo-art deco metal component. In short, make the stadium quirky, funky, eye-catching. VU could even reduce capacity to about 28,000.

No doubt, the SEC could replace VU. But I would think the Big Ten or the ACC would like having a presence in Nashville and might take VU. Yes, I live in what some of us now call Tower Crane City (the construction of tall buildings is noteworthy) and I'm militantly biased toward this town. But I have been to many of the cities/towns in which SEC universities are located and Nashville is like New York City compared to them. I know that sounds insulting but ...

Anyway, I could spend hours on this topic. I have the day off so I'm typing more than I would otherwise.

I enjoy reading your posts, JRsec.
(10-14-2019 09:41 AM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 09:54 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 09:38 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 08:40 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 08:10 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]I have followed Vanderbilt sports since about 1970 and will admit this season's football team is a disaster. I also will acknowledge that in, say, 20 to 30 years years, VU could be a partial member of the SEC (or gone altogether). But VU and Nashville bring various elements to the table that are appealing and important to the SEC. And, yes, I admit I live in Nashville and am biased so maybe I'm a complete ignoramus who can't see the big picture. Anyway, when I see posts of this type, I sometime feel a need to weigh in.

I don't think there is anyone here who doesn't appreciate Nashville being part of SEC country. But how would you suggest that Vanderbilt proceed. Will they expend the resources to stay up to speed in facilities and venues? Will they try to enhance attendance at events? Or will they continue to syphon off the SEC pay day to just stay afloat athletically?

VU has shown no propensity for, or desire to, try to remain relatively competitive in anything but baseball and women's bowling.

VU has made every effort to stay competitive in men's and women's tennis and, to some extent, women's soccer. Admittedly, these are minor sports.

Now, for men's hoops ... maybe there is hope with JStackhouse. We don't know yet. The women's hoops situation is, admittedly, troubling.

So I don't fully agree with your point, but your point is worth pondering. I understand.

What I would argue more broadly is that every P5 needs "a VU," i.e., a university that is so unlike (in academics, athletics, location, mission, student body (VU is 40 percent students of color), etc.) its intra-league bethren that it almost is oddly refreshing (at least if you're a Vandy fan).

As to how VU proceed (specifically in football), I could take weeks to offer my views but I'm not sure it would be helpful or productive. My great great aunt was one of the first women to attend the university (in the 1920s) and my father as a newborn almost died at what was the precursor to VUMC in 1931. I have had no fewer than 10 close family members attend or work at the university since then (my brother has taught at VU the past 11 years, and my nephew attends currently). I once worked there part-time for three years. I am so, almost militantly, biased, that to ask me that question might not yield a fair answer.

Suffice to say, JRSec, your question is very valid and it is very difficult (for, to an extent, personal and emotional reasons) for me to answer. It is also difficult because, quite frankly, VU has been very bad the last few years in the two sports that count the most.

Thanks for your question and understanding.

My understanding is this:
1. The SEC has never asked a school to leave, nor will it.
2. Vanderbilt is a nice academic bell cow for the SEC.
3. Vanderbilt has done nothing to offer modern amenities required now at other SEC venues. They always claim space is the problem for improvement of the football and baseball facilities. I'm not sure that I buy that the basketball venue needs upgrading. It seems to me many of our so called upgrades in hoops actually cheapened the experience and crowded fewer seats into smaller venues in an uncomfortable way.

So my quandary is between these extremes. Historically Vandy's place is secured. But good grief it costs so little to make even a small stadium more comfortable and modernized. Your fans take advantage of that everywhere in the conference, but we can't in Nashville. Vandy is well endowed. There is no reason for this. And therein lies the rub.

Paying for yourselves is one issue, but failing to meet conference standards for the sake of the fans is another. Tulane with much less is doing much better.

And making one other point of importance. Keeping Vanderbilt instead of replacing them with a more competitive school costs each other member of the SEC ~ 3 million per year per each. We'd have no problem filling that slot. I sometimes believe the Vanderbilt administration doesn't take that dynamic seriously enough.


Agree with you on Tulane. That university has done a fine job with upgrading its athletics (facilities, coaches, etc.).

I do feel VU has done a strong job with Hawkins Field upgrades.

As to your "I sometimes believe the Vanderbilt administration doesn't take that dynamic seriously enough" comment ... yes, I can respectfully see some validity to that criticism. This is where I hope Malcolm Turner has a positive impact.

One of the things that makes VU's three major facilities (Vanderbilt Stadium, Hawkins Field and Memorial Gymnasium) "special" (and as a homer I know some will laugh at my use of that word) is the orientation of three in relation to each other. They "hug" themselves and, to an extent, the adjacent Marriott hotel building and the 2525 Building. For urban placemaking enthusiasts such as myself, that is a special configuration that does not need to tampered with.

So (and I'll make this brief) ... take the existing football stadium and overhaul it. Remove most of the bleacher seats to add chair backs, perhaps eliminate seating in the south endzone (like Memphis did, and nicely so, with the Liberty Bowl) and "dress" the exterior with, for example, a neo-art deco metal component. In short, make the stadium quirky, funky, eye-catching. VU could even reduce capacity to about 28,000.

No doubt, the SEC could replace VU. But I would think the Big Ten or the ACC would like having a presence in Nashville and might take VU. Yes, I live in what some of us now call Tower Crane City (the construction of tall buildings is noteworthy) and I'm militantly biased toward this town. But I have been to many of the cities/towns in which SEC universities are located and Nashville is like New York City compared to them. I know that sounds insulting but ...

Anyway, I could spend hours on this topic. I have the day off so I'm typing more than I would otherwise.

I enjoy reading your posts, JRsec.

Vanderbilt might be a bit closer to being at home in the ACC but I can't see a cultural fit at all with the Big 10. But you are definitely more SEC than ACC geographically and at your roots.

As for being like New York City to the other campus towns, I can't help but chuckle. None of the rest of us identify with NYC! We don't want to be vertical cities. In fact gong 5 floors in Auburn seems so out of place and the builders downtown are doing that now and it's not a welcome site to most of the locals.

Nashville is the Grand Ole Opry, and as such part of the cultural base of the South. It's not a bad drive and there is plenty to do and it's not Atlanta which is a plus. There will always be a place for Atlanta, Nashville and New Orleans in the South and we like to visit those places, but most wouldn't want to live in any of them. I suppose if I were to pick a city in the South to live in it would be a toss up between Savannah and Chattanooga, but that's just me. I love to fish. Salt water or fresh. So the Gulf Stream or the Nickajack either are lovely.
I don't see any reason for Vandy to make any serious alterations to Memorial Coliseum. It's unique and quirky and that's part of its charm. Unless they start selling 5-10K more tickets per game then there's really no need for a new arena.

The football stadium is a problem though. It's outdated and small. The new wave of college fans are now expecting more premium seating and more comfort with regard to food, bathrooms, and the overall entertainment experience. If schools like Northwestern and Stanford can do it then I don't see why Vanderbilt can't.

I also don't see a reason Vandy shouldn't have a softball team. It's starting to become a relevant sport nationally. ESPN and the like dedicate a lot of air time in the Spring to college baseball and softball. Vandy should be helping with that movement.

Point being, Vandy should make more of an effort to contribute to the pot.
Baton Rouge is not a small place. Columbia is the largest SC city but not so congested downtown. The metro area is very spread out. Athens, Georgia has really grown and very close to Atlanta sprawl. I love Athens, it is the best campus (imo)---anywhere! Gainesville, Fla. is a moderate size and has really grown. Lexington, KY is far from being a tiny town. Nice campus.

Nashville may be the largest SEC host city and is certainly a tourist destination. For the SEC, they are strategically located.

It has been a few decades since I was in Vandy's stadium. It seemed sorta tight then, but thought the atmosphere was good. They were hosting Georgia, so it was full.

Then there is Starkvegas. In the 80s, that field (not the concrete) was beautiful with a state-of-the-art underground irrigation system. The current digital scoreboard is one of the better ones in the country. Can't get more on-campus than there while having plenty of parking available. Now if they too, can do something about this year's stinky-winky fb program.

I have no idea why I'm rambling; I don't drink.
(10-14-2019 07:52 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote: [ -> ]Baton Rouge is not a small place. Columbia is the largest SC city but not so congested downtown. The metro area is very spread out. Athens, Georgia has really grown and very close to Atlanta sprawl. I love Athens, it is the best campus (imo)---anywhere! Gainesville, Fla. is a moderate size and has really grown. Lexington, KY is far from being a tiny town. Nice campus.

Nashville may be the largest SEC host city and is certainly a tourist destination. For the SEC, they are strategically located.

It has been a few decades since I was in Vandy's stadium. It seemed sorta tight then, but thought the atmosphere was good. They were hosting Georgia, so it was full.

Then there is Starkvegas. In the 80s, that field (not the concrete) was beautiful with a state-of-the-art underground irrigation system. The current digital scoreboard is one of the better ones in the country. Can't get more on-campus than there while having plenty of parking available. Now if they too, can do something about this year's stinky-winky fb program.

I have no idea why I'm rambling; I don't drink.

Well if you can ramble like that without booze then why would you need to drink?04-cheers

The issue here is that Vandy's stadium hasn't had an upgrade since the early 80's. They offer no softball. And their competitiveness in any sport other than baseball and a couple of non revenue sports is approaching nil. Yet, they earn an equal share at 46 million last year. My point is that on much less Tulane is doing better. So Vandy has no excuse.
(10-14-2019 10:32 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-14-2019 09:41 AM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 09:54 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 09:38 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 08:40 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think there is anyone here who doesn't appreciate Nashville being part of SEC country. But how would you suggest that Vanderbilt proceed. Will they expend the resources to stay up to speed in facilities and venues? Will they try to enhance attendance at events? Or will they continue to syphon off the SEC pay day to just stay afloat athletically?

VU has shown no propensity for, or desire to, try to remain relatively competitive in anything but baseball and women's bowling.

VU has made every effort to stay competitive in men's and women's tennis and, to some extent, women's soccer. Admittedly, these are minor sports.

Now, for men's hoops ... maybe there is hope with JStackhouse. We don't know yet. The women's hoops situation is, admittedly, troubling.

So I don't fully agree with your point, but your point is worth pondering. I understand.

What I would argue more broadly is that every P5 needs "a VU," i.e., a university that is so unlike (in academics, athletics, location, mission, student body (VU is 40 percent students of color), etc.) its intra-league bethren that it almost is oddly refreshing (at least if you're a Vandy fan).

As to how VU proceed (specifically in football), I could take weeks to offer my views but I'm not sure it would be helpful or productive. My great great aunt was one of the first women to attend the university (in the 1920s) and my father as a newborn almost died at what was the precursor to VUMC in 1931. I have had no fewer than 10 close family members attend or work at the university since then (my brother has taught at VU the past 11 years, and my nephew attends currently). I once worked there part-time for three years. I am so, almost militantly, biased, that to ask me that question might not yield a fair answer.

Suffice to say, JRSec, your question is very valid and it is very difficult (for, to an extent, personal and emotional reasons) for me to answer. It is also difficult because, quite frankly, VU has been very bad the last few years in the two sports that count the most.

Thanks for your question and understanding.

My understanding is this:
1. The SEC has never asked a school to leave, nor will it.
2. Vanderbilt is a nice academic bell cow for the SEC.
3. Vanderbilt has done nothing to offer modern amenities required now at other SEC venues. They always claim space is the problem for improvement of the football and baseball facilities. I'm not sure that I buy that the basketball venue needs upgrading. It seems to me many of our so called upgrades in hoops actually cheapened the experience and crowded fewer seats into smaller venues in an uncomfortable way.

So my quandary is between these extremes. Historically Vandy's place is secured. But good grief it costs so little to make even a small stadium more comfortable and modernized. Your fans take advantage of that everywhere in the conference, but we can't in Nashville. Vandy is well endowed. There is no reason for this. And therein lies the rub.

Paying for yourselves is one issue, but failing to meet conference standards for the sake of the fans is another. Tulane with much less is doing much better.

And making one other point of importance. Keeping Vanderbilt instead of replacing them with a more competitive school costs each other member of the SEC ~ 3 million per year per each. We'd have no problem filling that slot. I sometimes believe the Vanderbilt administration doesn't take that dynamic seriously enough.


Agree with you on Tulane. That university has done a fine job with upgrading its athletics (facilities, coaches, etc.).

I do feel VU has done a strong job with Hawkins Field upgrades.

As to your "I sometimes believe the Vanderbilt administration doesn't take that dynamic seriously enough" comment ... yes, I can respectfully see some validity to that criticism. This is where I hope Malcolm Turner has a positive impact.

One of the things that makes VU's three major facilities (Vanderbilt Stadium, Hawkins Field and Memorial Gymnasium) "special" (and as a homer I know some will laugh at my use of that word) is the orientation of three in relation to each other. They "hug" themselves and, to an extent, the adjacent Marriott hotel building and the 2525 Building. For urban placemaking enthusiasts such as myself, that is a special configuration that does not need to tampered with.

So (and I'll make this brief) ... take the existing football stadium and overhaul it. Remove most of the bleacher seats to add chair backs, perhaps eliminate seating in the south endzone (like Memphis did, and nicely so, with the Liberty Bowl) and "dress" the exterior with, for example, a neo-art deco metal component. In short, make the stadium quirky, funky, eye-catching. VU could even reduce capacity to about 28,000.

No doubt, the SEC could replace VU. But I would think the Big Ten or the ACC would like having a presence in Nashville and might take VU. Yes, I live in what some of us now call Tower Crane City (the construction of tall buildings is noteworthy) and I'm militantly biased toward this town. But I have been to many of the cities/towns in which SEC universities are located and Nashville is like New York City compared to them. I know that sounds insulting but ...

Anyway, I could spend hours on this topic. I have the day off so I'm typing more than I would otherwise.

I enjoy reading your posts, JRsec.

Vanderbilt might be a bit closer to being at home in the ACC but I can't see a cultural fit at all with the Big 10. But you are definitely more SEC than ACC geographically and at your roots.

As for being like New York City to the other campus towns, I can't help but chuckle. None of the rest of us identify with NYC! We don't want to be vertical cities. In fact gong 5 floors in Auburn seems so out of place and the builders downtown are doing that now and it's not a welcome site to most of the locals.

Nashville is the Grand Ole Opry, and as such part of the cultural base of the South. It's not a bad drive and there is plenty to do and it's not Atlanta which is a plus. There will always be a place for Atlanta, Nashville and New Orleans in the South and we like to visit those places, but most wouldn't want to live in any of them. I suppose if I were to pick a city in the South to live in it would be a toss up between Savannah and Chattanooga, but that's just me. I love to fish. Salt water or fresh. So the Gulf Stream or the Nickajack either are lovely.


Was without Internet service yesterday, JRsec, and will get you a response tonight. I hear Auburn is a fantastic college town.
(10-14-2019 07:59 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-14-2019 07:52 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote: [ -> ]Baton Rouge is not a small place. Columbia is the largest SC city but not so congested downtown. The metro area is very spread out. Athens, Georgia has really grown and very close to Atlanta sprawl. I love Athens, it is the best campus (imo)---anywhere! Gainesville, Fla. is a moderate size and has really grown. Lexington, KY is far from being a tiny town. Nice campus.

Nashville may be the largest SEC host city and is certainly a tourist destination. For the SEC, they are strategically located.

It has been a few decades since I was in Vandy's stadium. It seemed sorta tight then, but thought the atmosphere was good. They were hosting Georgia, so it was full.

Then there is Starkvegas. In the 80s, that field (not the concrete) was beautiful with a state-of-the-art underground irrigation system. The current digital scoreboard is one of the better ones in the country. Can't get more on-campus than there while having plenty of parking available. Now if they too, can do something about this year's stinky-winky fb program.

I have no idea why I'm rambling; I don't drink.

Well if you can ramble like that without booze then why would you need to drink?04-cheers

The issue here is that Vandy's stadium hasn't had an upgrade since the early 80's. They offer no softball. And their competitiveness in any sport other than baseball and a couple of non revenue sports is approaching nil. Yet, they earn an equal share at 46 million last year. My point is that on much less Tulane is doing better. So Vandy has no excuse.

With tuition at Vanderbilt, Duke, Wake Forest, BC, Syracuse, Northwestern, etc. I can see why they view they give more than enough to scholarship athletes.

Even state schools such as Georgia Tech and Virginia may feel the same way.

Actually, maybe go all the way. Don't enroll most athletes for fb and bb as students. It is essentially a mercenary situation now. Fans don't fully realize the delusion now. They'll foot the bill one way or the other. No more academic scandals. Those that want to be students and qualify, accommodate them somehow.
Pay them! Pay them bigtime! Certain players may be worth more than a 6 million a year coach. Give them a big cut for the use of their brand. Universities become corporate owners. Getting in debt like what happened to FSU and Maryland prior, don't get bailed out. Someone else buys their assets. Not the taxpayers responsibility for poor management. Texas will excel with their superior booster network, and they ain't sharing.
Reverse the current circumstances. Money becomes the entitlement. Academics become the qualifying option.

Create leagues that want to opt out. It is better for the academic elite schools. Many will choose to drop out of fb. Probably the best and save money.
(10-14-2019 10:32 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-14-2019 09:41 AM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 09:54 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 09:38 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 08:40 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think there is anyone here who doesn't appreciate Nashville being part of SEC country. But how would you suggest that Vanderbilt proceed. Will they expend the resources to stay up to speed in facilities and venues? Will they try to enhance attendance at events? Or will they continue to syphon off the SEC pay day to just stay afloat athletically?

VU has shown no propensity for, or desire to, try to remain relatively competitive in anything but baseball and women's bowling.

VU has made every effort to stay competitive in men's and women's tennis and, to some extent, women's soccer. Admittedly, these are minor sports.

Now, for men's hoops ... maybe there is hope with JStackhouse. We don't know yet. The women's hoops situation is, admittedly, troubling.

So I don't fully agree with your point, but your point is worth pondering. I understand.

What I would argue more broadly is that every P5 needs "a VU," i.e., a university that is so unlike (in academics, athletics, location, mission, student body (VU is 40 percent students of color), etc.) its intra-league bethren that it almost is oddly refreshing (at least if you're a Vandy fan).

As to how VU proceed (specifically in football), I could take weeks to offer my views but I'm not sure it would be helpful or productive. My great great aunt was one of the first women to attend the university (in the 1920s) and my father as a newborn almost died at what was the precursor to VUMC in 1931. I have had no fewer than 10 close family members attend or work at the university since then (my brother has taught at VU the past 11 years, and my nephew attends currently). I once worked there part-time for three years. I am so, almost militantly, biased, that to ask me that question might not yield a fair answer.

Suffice to say, JRSec, your question is very valid and it is very difficult (for, to an extent, personal and emotional reasons) for me to answer. It is also difficult because, quite frankly, VU has been very bad the last few years in the two sports that count the most.

Thanks for your question and understanding.

My understanding is this:
1. The SEC has never asked a school to leave, nor will it.
2. Vanderbilt is a nice academic bell cow for the SEC.
3. Vanderbilt has done nothing to offer modern amenities required now at other SEC venues. They always claim space is the problem for improvement of the football and baseball facilities. I'm not sure that I buy that the basketball venue needs upgrading. It seems to me many of our so called upgrades in hoops actually cheapened the experience and crowded fewer seats into smaller venues in an uncomfortable way.

So my quandary is between these extremes. Historically Vandy's place is secured. But good grief it costs so little to make even a small stadium more comfortable and modernized. Your fans take advantage of that everywhere in the conference, but we can't in Nashville. Vandy is well endowed. There is no reason for this. And therein lies the rub.

Paying for yourselves is one issue, but failing to meet conference standards for the sake of the fans is another. Tulane with much less is doing much better.

And making one other point of importance. Keeping Vanderbilt instead of replacing them with a more competitive school costs each other member of the SEC ~ 3 million per year per each. We'd have no problem filling that slot. I sometimes believe the Vanderbilt administration doesn't take that dynamic seriously enough.


Agree with you on Tulane. That university has done a fine job with upgrading its athletics (facilities, coaches, etc.).

I do feel VU has done a strong job with Hawkins Field upgrades.

As to your "I sometimes believe the Vanderbilt administration doesn't take that dynamic seriously enough" comment ... yes, I can respectfully see some validity to that criticism. This is where I hope Malcolm Turner has a positive impact.

One of the things that makes VU's three major facilities (Vanderbilt Stadium, Hawkins Field and Memorial Gymnasium) "special" (and as a homer I know some will laugh at my use of that word) is the orientation of three in relation to each other. They "hug" themselves and, to an extent, the adjacent Marriott hotel building and the 2525 Building. For urban placemaking enthusiasts such as myself, that is a special configuration that does not need to tampered with.

So (and I'll make this brief) ... take the existing football stadium and overhaul it. Remove most of the bleacher seats to add chair backs, perhaps eliminate seating in the south endzone (like Memphis did, and nicely so, with the Liberty Bowl) and "dress" the exterior with, for example, a neo-art deco metal component. In short, make the stadium quirky, funky, eye-catching. VU could even reduce capacity to about 28,000.

No doubt, the SEC could replace VU. But I would think the Big Ten or the ACC would like having a presence in Nashville and might take VU. Yes, I live in what some of us now call Tower Crane City (the construction of tall buildings is noteworthy) and I'm militantly biased toward this town. But I have been to many of the cities/towns in which SEC universities are located and Nashville is like New York City compared to them. I know that sounds insulting but ...

Anyway, I could spend hours on this topic. I have the day off so I'm typing more than I would otherwise.

I enjoy reading your posts, JRsec.

Vanderbilt might be a bit closer to being at home in the ACC but I can't see a cultural fit at all with the Big 10. But you are definitely more SEC than ACC geographically and at your roots.

As for being like New York City to the other campus towns, I can't help but chuckle. None of the rest of us identify with NYC! We don't want to be vertical cities. In fact gong 5 floors in Auburn seems so out of place and the builders downtown are doing that now and it's not a welcome site to most of the locals.

Nashville is the Grand Ole Opry, and as such part of the cultural base of the South. It's not a bad drive and there is plenty to do and it's not Atlanta which is a plus. There will always be a place for Atlanta, Nashville and New Orleans in the South and we like to visit those places, but most wouldn't want to live in any of them. I suppose if I were to pick a city in the South to live in it would be a toss up between Savannah and Chattanooga, but that's just me. I love to fish. Salt water or fresh. So the Gulf Stream or the Nickajack either are lovely.


The "cultural fit" with the Big Ten would be modest, admittedly. The ACC would make sense: football would be less rough on Vanderbilt and the ACC is home to seven private schools (if you count Notre Dame) and two more that are like privates (UNC and UVa). That would be a strong cultural fit for VU. And basketball is the top sport, which could be helpful to VU hoops. But it's not going to happen. Vanderbilt is stuck with the SEC and the SEC is stuck with VU — for better or worse for both parties.

Excellent points about Nashville and how lots of SEC fans view it. They probably enjoy visiting because it is so unlike either 1. the places in which their teams are located; 2. the largest city in their respective states; and/or 3. their hometowns. Plus it is an almost guaranteed road trip football win, which makes their weekend travels efforts more enjoyable. Agree, that most of these people would not want to live here and that's cool. I can respect that. I would enjoy visiting the Loveliest Village on the Plains. Have never done so. I did not know buildings of five floors or taller were under construction in Auburn — but I'm not surprised. Many places are getting more urban with their form and function. And verticality, as you note, is an example. Lexington is an underrated SEC city. I hear Fayetteville is strong. Have never been.

Savannah and Chattanooga are both outstanding smallish cities. Love them both, particularly the Noog.
(10-14-2019 01:47 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]I don't see any reason for Vandy to make any serious alterations to Memorial Coliseum. It's unique and quirky and that's part of its charm. Unless they start selling 5-10K more tickets per game then there's really no need for a new arena.

The football stadium is a problem though. It's outdated and small. The new wave of college fans are now expecting more premium seating and more comfort with regard to food, bathrooms, and the overall entertainment experience. If schools like Northwestern and Stanford can do it then I don't see why Vanderbilt can't.

I also don't see a reason Vandy shouldn't have a softball team. It's starting to become a relevant sport nationally. ESPN and the like dedicate a lot of air time in the Spring to college baseball and softball. Vandy should be helping with that movement.

Point being, Vandy should make more of an effort to contribute to the pot.


Memorial has been given various upgrades over the years but no sweeping overhaul. Many of the changes have been "cosmetic" in nature and not (at least for me) particularly appealing.

Agree fully on VU needing women's softball.

Our football stadium is a disaster overall — notwithstanding what I feel is a distinctive setting.

Agree fully that Vandy should make more of an effort to contribute to the SEC pot.
(10-15-2019 09:19 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-14-2019 10:32 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-14-2019 09:41 AM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 09:54 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 09:38 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]VU has made every effort to stay competitive in men's and women's tennis and, to some extent, women's soccer. Admittedly, these are minor sports.

Now, for men's hoops ... maybe there is hope with JStackhouse. We don't know yet. The women's hoops situation is, admittedly, troubling.

So I don't fully agree with your point, but your point is worth pondering. I understand.

What I would argue more broadly is that every P5 needs "a VU," i.e., a university that is so unlike (in academics, athletics, location, mission, student body (VU is 40 percent students of color), etc.) its intra-league bethren that it almost is oddly refreshing (at least if you're a Vandy fan).

As to how VU proceed (specifically in football), I could take weeks to offer my views but I'm not sure it would be helpful or productive. My great great aunt was one of the first women to attend the university (in the 1920s) and my father as a newborn almost died at what was the precursor to VUMC in 1931. I have had no fewer than 10 close family members attend or work at the university since then (my brother has taught at VU the past 11 years, and my nephew attends currently). I once worked there part-time for three years. I am so, almost militantly, biased, that to ask me that question might not yield a fair answer.

Suffice to say, JRSec, your question is very valid and it is very difficult (for, to an extent, personal and emotional reasons) for me to answer. It is also difficult because, quite frankly, VU has been very bad the last few years in the two sports that count the most.

Thanks for your question and understanding.

My understanding is this:
1. The SEC has never asked a school to leave, nor will it.
2. Vanderbilt is a nice academic bell cow for the SEC.
3. Vanderbilt has done nothing to offer modern amenities required now at other SEC venues. They always claim space is the problem for improvement of the football and baseball facilities. I'm not sure that I buy that the basketball venue needs upgrading. It seems to me many of our so called upgrades in hoops actually cheapened the experience and crowded fewer seats into smaller venues in an uncomfortable way.

So my quandary is between these extremes. Historically Vandy's place is secured. But good grief it costs so little to make even a small stadium more comfortable and modernized. Your fans take advantage of that everywhere in the conference, but we can't in Nashville. Vandy is well endowed. There is no reason for this. And therein lies the rub.

Paying for yourselves is one issue, but failing to meet conference standards for the sake of the fans is another. Tulane with much less is doing much better.

And making one other point of importance. Keeping Vanderbilt instead of replacing them with a more competitive school costs each other member of the SEC ~ 3 million per year per each. We'd have no problem filling that slot. I sometimes believe the Vanderbilt administration doesn't take that dynamic seriously enough.


Agree with you on Tulane. That university has done a fine job with upgrading its athletics (facilities, coaches, etc.).

I do feel VU has done a strong job with Hawkins Field upgrades.

As to your "I sometimes believe the Vanderbilt administration doesn't take that dynamic seriously enough" comment ... yes, I can respectfully see some validity to that criticism. This is where I hope Malcolm Turner has a positive impact.

One of the things that makes VU's three major facilities (Vanderbilt Stadium, Hawkins Field and Memorial Gymnasium) "special" (and as a homer I know some will laugh at my use of that word) is the orientation of three in relation to each other. They "hug" themselves and, to an extent, the adjacent Marriott hotel building and the 2525 Building. For urban placemaking enthusiasts such as myself, that is a special configuration that does not need to tampered with.

So (and I'll make this brief) ... take the existing football stadium and overhaul it. Remove most of the bleacher seats to add chair backs, perhaps eliminate seating in the south endzone (like Memphis did, and nicely so, with the Liberty Bowl) and "dress" the exterior with, for example, a neo-art deco metal component. In short, make the stadium quirky, funky, eye-catching. VU could even reduce capacity to about 28,000.

No doubt, the SEC could replace VU. But I would think the Big Ten or the ACC would like having a presence in Nashville and might take VU. Yes, I live in what some of us now call Tower Crane City (the construction of tall buildings is noteworthy) and I'm militantly biased toward this town. But I have been to many of the cities/towns in which SEC universities are located and Nashville is like New York City compared to them. I know that sounds insulting but ...

Anyway, I could spend hours on this topic. I have the day off so I'm typing more than I would otherwise.

I enjoy reading your posts, JRsec.

Vanderbilt might be a bit closer to being at home in the ACC but I can't see a cultural fit at all with the Big 10. But you are definitely more SEC than ACC geographically and at your roots.

As for being like New York City to the other campus towns, I can't help but chuckle. None of the rest of us identify with NYC! We don't want to be vertical cities. In fact gong 5 floors in Auburn seems so out of place and the builders downtown are doing that now and it's not a welcome site to most of the locals.

Nashville is the Grand Ole Opry, and as such part of the cultural base of the South. It's not a bad drive and there is plenty to do and it's not Atlanta which is a plus. There will always be a place for Atlanta, Nashville and New Orleans in the South and we like to visit those places, but most wouldn't want to live in any of them. I suppose if I were to pick a city in the South to live in it would be a toss up between Savannah and Chattanooga, but that's just me. I love to fish. Salt water or fresh. So the Gulf Stream or the Nickajack either are lovely.


The "cultural fit" with the Big Ten would be modest, admittedly. The ACC would make sense: football would be less rough on Vanderbilt and the ACC is home to seven private schools (if you count Notre Dame) and two more that are like privates (UNC and UVa). That would be a strong cultural fit for VU. And basketball is the top sport, which could be helpful to VU hoops. But it's not going to happen. Vanderbilt is stuck with the SEC and the SEC is stuck with VU — for better or worse for both parties.

Excellent points about Nashville and how lots of SEC fans view it. They probably enjoy visiting because it is so unlike either 1. the places in which their teams are located; 2. the largest city in their respective states; and/or 3. their hometowns. Plus it is an almost guaranteed road trip football win, which makes their weekend travels efforts more enjoyable. Agree, that most of these people would not want to live here and that's cool. I can respect that. I would enjoy visiting the Loveliest Village on the Plains. Have never done so. I did not know buildings of five floors or taller were under construction in Auburn — but I'm not surprised. Many places are getting more urban with their form and function. And verticality, as you note, is an example. Lexington is an underrated SEC city. I hear Fayetteville is strong. Have never been.

Savannah and Chattanooga are both outstanding smallish cities. Love them both, particularly the Noog.

The only viable way for Vanderbilt to leave the SEC for the ACC would be more or less in a trade that might send a N.C. State or Va Tech to the SEC in exchange for Vanderbilt so that both conferences could expand their viewing markets.

For that to happen the 2 schools involved would have to want the moves and initiate the moves. The problem with this is why would Vanderbilt trade 46 million (and a lot more to come) in the SEC for 29 million (and a little more to come) in the SEC? They wouldn't.

So until there is a more equitable distribution of TV revenues between the current P5 such moves will simply be impossible. But the cultural fit in the ACC would be much tighter with regard to other private schools, as would the cultural fit of an N.C. State or Va Tech be much closer to the SEC norm.

As long as things stand as they do currently the only expansion moves the SEC would consider would be Texas, Oklahoma, Florida State, and possibly Clemson in that order. Why? Because their content value multiplied with the current SEC content value would be massive. Nobody else really adds enough value to cover their own inclusion in the SEC and that goes for Va Tech and N.C. State which I selected because they are duplicating the market presence of other ACC schools (UVa, UNC, Duke, Wake Forest). So such a trade would exchange the duplicated market of Tennessee for the duplicated market of either North Carolina or Virginia. Such a trade adds value to both conferences because of it. But the revenue is the monumental obstacle to such considerations.
(10-15-2019 09:45 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-15-2019 09:19 PM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-14-2019 10:32 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-14-2019 09:41 AM)bill dazzle Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-13-2019 09:54 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]My understanding is this:
1. The SEC has never asked a school to leave, nor will it.
2. Vanderbilt is a nice academic bell cow for the SEC.
3. Vanderbilt has done nothing to offer modern amenities required now at other SEC venues. They always claim space is the problem for improvement of the football and baseball facilities. I'm not sure that I buy that the basketball venue needs upgrading. It seems to me many of our so called upgrades in hoops actually cheapened the experience and crowded fewer seats into smaller venues in an uncomfortable way.

So my quandary is between these extremes. Historically Vandy's place is secured. But good grief it costs so little to make even a small stadium more comfortable and modernized. Your fans take advantage of that everywhere in the conference, but we can't in Nashville. Vandy is well endowed. There is no reason for this. And therein lies the rub.

Paying for yourselves is one issue, but failing to meet conference standards for the sake of the fans is another. Tulane with much less is doing much better.

And making one other point of importance. Keeping Vanderbilt instead of replacing them with a more competitive school costs each other member of the SEC ~ 3 million per year per each. We'd have no problem filling that slot. I sometimes believe the Vanderbilt administration doesn't take that dynamic seriously enough.


Agree with you on Tulane. That university has done a fine job with upgrading its athletics (facilities, coaches, etc.).

I do feel VU has done a strong job with Hawkins Field upgrades.

As to your "I sometimes believe the Vanderbilt administration doesn't take that dynamic seriously enough" comment ... yes, I can respectfully see some validity to that criticism. This is where I hope Malcolm Turner has a positive impact.

One of the things that makes VU's three major facilities (Vanderbilt Stadium, Hawkins Field and Memorial Gymnasium) "special" (and as a homer I know some will laugh at my use of that word) is the orientation of three in relation to each other. They "hug" themselves and, to an extent, the adjacent Marriott hotel building and the 2525 Building. For urban placemaking enthusiasts such as myself, that is a special configuration that does not need to tampered with.

So (and I'll make this brief) ... take the existing football stadium and overhaul it. Remove most of the bleacher seats to add chair backs, perhaps eliminate seating in the south endzone (like Memphis did, and nicely so, with the Liberty Bowl) and "dress" the exterior with, for example, a neo-art deco metal component. In short, make the stadium quirky, funky, eye-catching. VU could even reduce capacity to about 28,000.

No doubt, the SEC could replace VU. But I would think the Big Ten or the ACC would like having a presence in Nashville and might take VU. Yes, I live in what some of us now call Tower Crane City (the construction of tall buildings is noteworthy) and I'm militantly biased toward this town. But I have been to many of the cities/towns in which SEC universities are located and Nashville is like New York City compared to them. I know that sounds insulting but ...

Anyway, I could spend hours on this topic. I have the day off so I'm typing more than I would otherwise.

I enjoy reading your posts, JRsec.

Vanderbilt might be a bit closer to being at home in the ACC but I can't see a cultural fit at all with the Big 10. But you are definitely more SEC than ACC geographically and at your roots.

As for being like New York City to the other campus towns, I can't help but chuckle. None of the rest of us identify with NYC! We don't want to be vertical cities. In fact gong 5 floors in Auburn seems so out of place and the builders downtown are doing that now and it's not a welcome site to most of the locals.

Nashville is the Grand Ole Opry, and as such part of the cultural base of the South. It's not a bad drive and there is plenty to do and it's not Atlanta which is a plus. There will always be a place for Atlanta, Nashville and New Orleans in the South and we like to visit those places, but most wouldn't want to live in any of them. I suppose if I were to pick a city in the South to live in it would be a toss up between Savannah and Chattanooga, but that's just me. I love to fish. Salt water or fresh. So the Gulf Stream or the Nickajack either are lovely.


The "cultural fit" with the Big Ten would be modest, admittedly. The ACC would make sense: football would be less rough on Vanderbilt and the ACC is home to seven private schools (if you count Notre Dame) and two more that are like privates (UNC and UVa). That would be a strong cultural fit for VU. And basketball is the top sport, which could be helpful to VU hoops. But it's not going to happen. Vanderbilt is stuck with the SEC and the SEC is stuck with VU — for better or worse for both parties.

Excellent points about Nashville and how lots of SEC fans view it. They probably enjoy visiting because it is so unlike either 1. the places in which their teams are located; 2. the largest city in their respective states; and/or 3. their hometowns. Plus it is an almost guaranteed road trip football win, which makes their weekend travels efforts more enjoyable. Agree, that most of these people would not want to live here and that's cool. I can respect that. I would enjoy visiting the Loveliest Village on the Plains. Have never done so. I did not know buildings of five floors or taller were under construction in Auburn — but I'm not surprised. Many places are getting more urban with their form and function. And verticality, as you note, is an example. Lexington is an underrated SEC city. I hear Fayetteville is strong. Have never been.

Savannah and Chattanooga are both outstanding smallish cities. Love them both, particularly the Noog.

The only viable way for Vanderbilt to leave the SEC for the ACC would be more or less in a trade that might send a N.C. State or Va Tech to the SEC in exchange for Vanderbilt so that both conferences could expand their viewing markets.

For that to happen the 2 schools involved would have to want the moves and initiate the moves. The problem with this is why would Vanderbilt trade 46 million (and a lot more to come) in the SEC for 29 million (and a little more to come) in the SEC? They wouldn't.

So until there is a more equitable distribution of TV revenues between the current P5 such moves will simply be impossible. But the cultural fit in the ACC would be much tighter with regard to other private schools, as would the cultural fit of an N.C. State or Va Tech be much closer to the SEC norm.

As long as things stand as they do currently the only expansion moves the SEC would consider would be Texas, Oklahoma, Florida State, and possibly Clemson in that order. Why? Because their content value multiplied with the current SEC content value would be massive. Nobody else really adds enough value to cover their own inclusion in the SEC and that goes for Va Tech and N.C. State which I selected because they are duplicating the market presence of other ACC schools (UVa, UNC, Duke, Wake Forest). So such a trade would exchange the duplicated market of Tennessee for the duplicated market of either North Carolina or Virginia. Such a trade adds value to both conferences because of it. But the revenue is the monumental obstacle to such considerations.


I agree with all this, JRsec. Spot on.

But since my sister attended both UNC and N.C. State and my sister-in-law attended Louisville, our family would like to see Vanderbilt in the ACC. That's just my selfish perspective on it — and it's an insane wish. Not going to happen.

I don't dislike the SEC (there is much about the league I actually enjoy following and LOTS about it that I respect). But VU as a university and Nashville as a city would seem (at least on paper) better suited in the ACC. VU gets lots of students from the states located along the Eastern Seaboard, and the ACC has lots of "city schools" (Syracuse, BC, Pitt, GaTech, Miami, Louisville and N.C. State).

If the SEC is going to add two to go to 16 ... I would like to see N.C. State (having a North Carolina school would be big) and either VaTech or West Virginia.
Pages: 1 2
Reference URL's