Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #641
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(11-05-2014 12:50 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(11-04-2014 05:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-04-2014 05:33 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(07-06-2013 08:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Let's assume the ACC stands firm with their recent additions and that everyone has indeed signed their GOR and that they get their network. Should Texas and Oklahoma realize the disadvantage long term that their conference is in and the Big 12 was suddenly open for the taking of new members who should the SEC add and why?

To me the ideal additions would be Kansas & Oklahoma. We would likely find ourselves in head to head competition with the Big 10 for http://csnbbs.com/jscripts/editor_themes...n.gifthese schools. Kansas is a better cultural fit for the Big 10. Oklahoma could fit in just about anywhere. I think the ideal here is highly unlikely. So my goal would be to add the Sooners and West Virginia. The Mountaineers would be joyous to be a part of the SEC and that is worth a lot to me. Oklahoma might choose the Big 10 but if they do in my opinion they will wind up like Nebraska, good, but a shadow of their former selves. Personally, I think they need Southern recruiting ties to stay viable.

If the Sooners did go elsewhere the Cowboys are fine with me. They are top 25 in profitability and are competitive in all sports.

Since I'm a little late to the party, I'll just rank my quasi-Big 12 additions:
1. OU, Nebraska
2. OU, WVU
3. OU, Kansas

I don't ever see Texas joining, let alone playing by the rules.

I appreciate your #1 but would Nebraska be a viable candidate now that they are in the Big 10? Or were you speaking of that pair as a viable Big 10 scenario? For the most part I agree with your preferences and your assessment of the Horns. But I do see merit in the Cowboys should OU not be available.
A lot of NU fans are not happy with their conference schedules and the lack of respect they are getting when they sit atop the standings in B1G West. Further expansion of the B1G in the east could make NU reconsider their conference affiliation and if they start talking to the Big 12, why not make a power play to grab OU with their long time rival Nebraska as part of the deal? The pods wouldn't be too bad:
NU OU Mizz Ark
A&M LSU Ole MSU
Ala Aub V UK
FL UGA USC Tenn

Further expansion in the East is not assured. Nebraska folks weren't the only ones miffed with the large move into the East that was an obvious market grab.

What you aren't figuring on is the fact that Nebraska has now bought into the Big Ten Network. Their fans rantings about scheduling and what not was very much expected when Nebraska moved to the Big Ten.

Plebian outrage is very much understood and designed for during these kinds of massive movements. The University of Nebraska decides where they go, not the fans. They Know their fans are a captive audience.

If they do anything big in order to make fans happy, it will be eating the cost of firing Bo Pelini early. I highly doubt the grumblings will get to that point but Nebraska is more likely to sacrifice him because the cost of doing that is much less than the cost of leaving the Big Ten. That doesn't even take into account the loss of face of doing an about face and going back to the Big 12. If you think Administrators are willing to do that then you don't understand the consequences to them of making that choice. That is equivalent to walking into the Board and asking to be fired. Moving to the Big Ten was that big of a deal. You don't go back on that kind of move. You make it work.
11-05-2014 06:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #642
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(11-05-2014 06:14 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-05-2014 12:50 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(11-04-2014 05:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-04-2014 05:33 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(07-06-2013 08:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Let's assume the ACC stands firm with their recent additions and that everyone has indeed signed their GOR and that they get their network. Should Texas and Oklahoma realize the disadvantage long term that their conference is in and the Big 12 was suddenly open for the taking of new members who should the SEC add and why?

To me the ideal additions would be Kansas & Oklahoma. We would likely find ourselves in head to head competition with the Big 10 for these schools. Kansas is a better cultural fit for the Big 10. Oklahoma could fit in just about anywhere. I think the ideal here is highly unlikely. So my goal would be to add the Sooners and West Virginia. The Mountaineers would be joyous to be a part of the SEC and that is worth a lot to me. Oklahoma might choose the Big 10 but if they do in my opinion they will wind up like Nebraska, good, but a shadow of their former selves. Personally, I think they need Southern recruiting ties to stay viable.

If the Sooners did go elsewhere the Cowboys are fine with me. They are top 25 in profitability and are competitive in all sports.

Since I'm a little late to the party, I'll just rank my quasi-Big 12 additions:
1. OU, Nebraska
2. OU, WVU
3. OU, Kansas

I don't ever see Texas joining, let alone playing by the rules.

I appreciate your #1 but would Nebraska be a viable candidate now that they are in the Big 10? Or were you speaking of that pair as a viable Big 10 scenario? For the most part I agree with your preferences and your assessment of the Horns. But I do see merit in the Cowboys should OU not be available.
A lot of NU fans are not happy with their conference schedules and the lack of respect they are getting when they sit atop the standings in B1G West. Further expansion of the B1G in the east could make NU reconsider their conference affiliation and if they start talking to the Big 12, why not make a power play to grab OU with their long time rival Nebraska as part of the deal? The pods wouldn't be too bad:
NU OU Mizz Ark
A&M LSU Ole MSU
Ala Aub V UK
FL UGA USC Tenn

That's definitely a new perspective. I suppose if the Big 10 took Virginia and North Carolina and those two insisted on Duke it would work out all the way around. The SEC moves to 18 with Oklahoma and Nebraska and Virginia Tech and N.C. State. Now that would be wild. But NU would be a geographical outlier for sure.

If the Big Ten did that, I would absolutely cut ties with the Big Ten. The sad thing is...knowing many of the minds at the top...they would seriously consider this if Nebraska was willing.
11-05-2014 06:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,892
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #643
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(11-05-2014 06:08 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(11-05-2014 06:14 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-05-2014 12:50 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(11-04-2014 05:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-04-2014 05:33 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  Since I'm a little late to the party, I'll just rank my quasi-Big 12 additions:
1. OU, Nebraska
2. OU, WVU
3. OU, Kansas

I don't ever see Texas joining, let alone playing by the rules.

I appreciate your #1 but would Nebraska be a viable candidate now that they are in the Big 10? Or were you speaking of that pair as a viable Big 10 scenario? For the most part I agree with your preferences and your assessment of the Horns. But I do see merit in the Cowboys should OU not be available.
A lot of NU fans are not happy with their conference schedules and the lack of respect they are getting when they sit atop the standings in B1G West. Further expansion of the B1G in the east could make NU reconsider their conference affiliation and if they start talking to the Big 12, why not make a power play to grab OU with their long time rival Nebraska as part of the deal? The pods wouldn't be too bad:
NU OU Mizz Ark
A&M LSU Ole MSU
Ala Aub V UK
FL UGA USC Tenn

That's definitely a new perspective. I suppose if the Big 10 took Virginia and North Carolina and those two insisted on Duke it would work out all the way around. The SEC moves to 18 with Oklahoma and Nebraska and Virginia Tech and N.C. State. Now that would be wild. But NU would be a geographical outlier for sure.

NU being a geographical outlier would be no different than Miami (FL) for any conference they join.

And not much more of one than they are now. Miami is another issue, but they are certainly an outlier to every conference.
11-05-2014 06:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jhawkmvp Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 443
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Kansas
Location: Over the Rainbow
Post: #644
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
NU won't leave the B1G. University presidents, including NU's, rightly love the academic associations the conference provides, plus like H1 mentioned NU has been buying into the B1G (and thus why they have gotten smaller cuts of B1G revenue than the other schools previously) so if they did leave there would be extra entanglements, plus the B1GN GoR runs into the 2030s I believe. The B1G will do like they did for PSU in the east and add some schools in the west to help keep NU in fold and to quell some discontent from original B1G schools with the growing eastern influence IMO. I think they are going to put a full court press on OU and KU in the future, and maybe in the near future (before 2017), to get to 16. If they are successful, they will then turn their eyes on Texas, if the Longhorns are interested, and UT would be if OU and KU are there, plus academically Texas identifies more closely with the B1G than any other conference. But it is Texas. They will do their own thing in the end. They could end up anywhere when the dust settles.

I will agree on this though, the if any conference can reunite OU and NU that would be great for their bottom line and for CFB in general. The biggest mistake the B12 made was not ensuring that rivalry continued annually. If the SEC could pull that off more power to them.
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2014 11:12 PM by jhawkmvp.)
11-05-2014 11:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jhawkmvp Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 443
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Kansas
Location: Over the Rainbow
Post: #645
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(11-05-2014 06:14 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-05-2014 12:50 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(11-04-2014 05:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-04-2014 05:33 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(07-06-2013 08:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Let's assume the ACC stands firm with their recent additions and that everyone has indeed signed their GOR and that they get their network. Should Texas and Oklahoma realize the disadvantage long term that their conference is in and the Big 12 was suddenly open for the taking of new members who should the SEC add and why?

To me the ideal additions would be Kansas & Oklahoma. We would likely find ourselves in head to head competition with the Big 10 for these schools. Kansas is a better cultural fit for the Big 10. Oklahoma could fit in just about anywhere. I think the ideal here is highly unlikely. So my goal would be to add the Sooners and West Virginia. The Mountaineers would be joyous to be a part of the SEC and that is worth a lot to me. Oklahoma might choose the Big 10 but if they do in my opinion they will wind up like Nebraska, good, but a shadow of their former selves. Personally, I think they need Southern recruiting ties to stay viable.

If the Sooners did go elsewhere the Cowboys are fine with me. They are top 25 in profitability and are competitive in all sports.

Since I'm a little late to the party, I'll just rank my quasi-Big 12 additions:
1. OU, Nebraska
2. OU, WVU
3. OU, Kansas

I don't ever see Texas joining, let alone playing by the rules.

I appreciate your #1 but would Nebraska be a viable candidate now that they are in the Big 10? Or were you speaking of that pair as a viable Big 10 scenario? For the most part I agree with your preferences and your assessment of the Horns. But I do see merit in the Cowboys should OU not be available.
A lot of NU fans are not happy with their conference schedules and the lack of respect they are getting when they sit atop the standings in B1G West. Further expansion of the B1G in the east could make NU reconsider their conference affiliation and if they start talking to the Big 12, why not make a power play to grab OU with their long time rival Nebraska as part of the deal? The pods wouldn't be too bad:
NU OU Mizz Ark
A&M LSU Ole MSU
Ala Aub V UK
FL UGA USC Tenn

That's definitely a new perspective. I suppose if the Big 10 took Virginia and North Carolina and those two insisted on Duke it would work out all the way around. The SEC moves to 18 with Oklahoma and Nebraska and Virginia Tech and N.C. State. Now that would be wild. But NU would be a geographical outlier for sure.

If that happened the ACC is a dead man walking. So would most of the remaining schools join Texas and Kansas in the B12 or would both leagues disintegrate and be absorbed by the B1G, SEC and PAC? Probably would depend on Texas and ESPN. I would lean towards ESPN trying to get ND, Texas, and FSU to form a new conference from the B12 and ACC remnants.

OU and NU added to the SEC would be crazy competitive FB in that 16 school conference you proposed; however, if I was the SEC commish and had my choice of those 3 combos I go with OU and KU every time. FB rules the SEC and you get that with OU. But the SEC needs more national BB draws. UK is the only strong one. KU provides that and should give the SEC a rivalry on par with UNC/Duke. BB is likely to ascend in value to conferences in the future for 2 reasons:

1) The conferences, once they get football settled, are going to turn their greedy eyes on the pot of BB gold the NCAA is hoarding and ensure that they get the bulk of this revenue for themselves, especially if the NCAA continues to display it's ineptitude and ineffectiveness to the world. A huge percentage of the value of NCAA basketball is the national tournament (around $800M dollars a year by itself if I remember correctly) which the NCAA pays out only around 25-35% back to the power conferences in aid of various forms or direct NCAA BB tourney credits.
2) Unless FB can get a handle on the concussion issues it is going to have fewer participants going forward, which will probably result in fewer people watching it in a decade or two once those kids who never played FB reach adulthood. Diversifying and building up your other sports offerings could be very important depending on how greatly FB is impacted.

At some point adding too many big FB schools results in fewer national brands because they cannibalize themselves. There are only so many wins to go around. In KU all the top schools get wins most of the time in FB, but KU greatly enhances the SEC BB value. From a cultural fit perspective WVU is the best and they would give the SEC more exposure in the north with reach outside of WV into PA, DC, VA, and MD; however, for football value NU is best, but the SEC has football value in spades. All three combos would be great for the SEC though.
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2014 11:59 PM by jhawkmvp.)
11-05-2014 11:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #646
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
You touch upon something that seems quite lost upon many jhawk. Imagine the combination of ESPN, the SEC and WVU in regards to pushing the SEC brand up into the Beltway. It isn't about how much clout WVU has in that area right now. It is about how much clout they would have after having the ESPN propaganda machine working in that direction as well as having the SEC brand backing them.

It seems to me to be a case of folks having a lack of vision in regards to what ESPN and the SEC could do with WVU.
11-06-2014 01:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #647
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(11-06-2014 01:30 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You touch upon something that seems quite lost upon many jhawk. Imagine the combination of ESPN, the SEC and WVU in regards to pushing the SEC brand up into the Beltway. It isn't about how much clout WVU has in that area right now. It is about how much clout they would have after having the ESPN propaganda machine working in that direction as well as having the SEC brand backing them.

It seems to me to be a case of folks having a lack of vision in regards to what ESPN and the SEC could do with WVU.

H! the exact thing applies to the ACC and the B1G.
Right now the ACC and the B1G each are about equal in viewership in the NE. The ACC on the back of Notre Dame and the B1G on the broad shoulders of Penn State.
The ACC could use WVU as an old "eastern indy" to help "top" the B1G in the NE market. Of course the opposite is true and the B1G could bury the ACC in the NE with the inclusion of West Virginia.
I think that there is a real possibility that Delany's next move (if it is to 16) would be a play for a combination of West Virginia and KENTUCKY. It is what I would do.
Knowing that Kansas would not likely join the SEC, the B1G could swing back around and pick up Kansas and Missouri if they decided to go to 18.
Bill Stewart appears to have been correct when he stated that one of the three (ACC, SEC, or the B1G) would pick up West Virginia before realignment was over.
11-06-2014 08:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,892
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #648
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(11-06-2014 08:57 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-06-2014 01:30 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You touch upon something that seems quite lost upon many jhawk. Imagine the combination of ESPN, the SEC and WVU in regards to pushing the SEC brand up into the Beltway. It isn't about how much clout WVU has in that area right now. It is about how much clout they would have after having the ESPN propaganda machine working in that direction as well as having the SEC brand backing them.

It seems to me to be a case of folks having a lack of vision in regards to what ESPN and the SEC could do with WVU.

H! the exact thing applies to the ACC and the B1G.
Right now the ACC and the B1G each are about equal in viewership in the NE. The ACC on the back of Notre Dame and the B1G on the broad shoulders of Penn State.
The ACC could use WVU as an old "eastern indy" to help "top" the B1G in the NE market. Of course the opposite is true and the B1G could bury the ACC in the NE with the inclusion of West Virginia.
I think that there is a real possibility that Delany's next move (if it is to 16) would be a play for a combination of West Virginia and KENTUCKY. It is what I would do.
Knowing that Kansas would not likely join the SEC, the B1G could swing back around and pick up Kansas and Missouri if they decided to go to 18.
Bill Stewart appears to have been correct when he stated that one of the three (ACC, SEC, or the B1G) would pick up West Virginia before realignment was over.
Ridiculous. The Big 10 is not breaking its CIC standards for West Virginia or Kentucky. They might however take a flyer on Connecticut at some point, or break with profile to go after Boston College and Syracuse both with good academics but private and non AAU. The only football school which is not AAU that they might go for would be Oklahoma and that's a push with the presidents.

Missouri talk is at least fair game since they fit the profile. But the rest is just plain silly.
(This post was last modified: 11-06-2014 02:15 PM by JRsec.)
11-06-2014 12:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #649
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(11-06-2014 08:57 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-06-2014 01:30 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You touch upon something that seems quite lost upon many jhawk. Imagine the combination of ESPN, the SEC and WVU in regards to pushing the SEC brand up into the Beltway. It isn't about how much clout WVU has in that area right now. It is about how much clout they would have after having the ESPN propaganda machine working in that direction as well as having the SEC brand backing them.

It seems to me to be a case of folks having a lack of vision in regards to what ESPN and the SEC could do with WVU.

H! the exact thing applies to the ACC and the B1G.
Right now the ACC and the B1G each are about equal in viewership in the NE. The ACC on the back of Notre Dame and the B1G on the broad shoulders of Penn State.
The ACC could use WVU as an old "eastern indy" to help "top" the B1G in the NE market. Of course the opposite is true and the B1G could bury the ACC in the NE with the inclusion of West Virginia.
I think that there is a real possibility that Delany's next move (if it is to 16) would be a play for a combination of West Virginia and KENTUCKY. It is what I would do.
Knowing that Kansas would not likely join the SEC, the B1G could swing back around and pick up Kansas and Missouri if they decided to go to 18.
Bill Stewart appears to have been correct when he stated that one of the three (ACC, SEC, or the B1G) would pick up West Virginia before realignment was over.

Look, I am going to assume you are being truthful in that you actually believe this. Generally we try not to troll each other here and this is coming from someone who loves to troll folks over on the main forum. To think though that the Big Ten would go with West Virginia and Kentucky....you don't understand the Big Ten perspective. I get it if you think it is a good idea but your perspective is very much different from the Big Ten perspective.

I have actually made mention in the past about how West Virginia in the Big Ten makes good sense in an athletic perspective. One East team and one West team would make for an easy division between four divisions. The combo of Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers and West Virginia is pretty sweet. I don't see it happening though and Kentucky just doesn't fit, sorry.

If the ACC was willing to take WVU though and if they were insistant on getting WVU instead of a third Texas program then I definitely could see it. I know JR will say no way to what I am about to say but ECU is a strong candidate for the one single G5 program that is left to get into the P5(P4). We all know the SEC desperately wants into North Carolina. If the ACC felt more strongly about continuing to counter the Big Ten in the Beltway then getting West Virginia is a very strong move for the ACC.

ECU to the SEC is as crazy of a conversation piece as UConn to the Big Ten is.
11-06-2014 06:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,892
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #650
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(11-06-2014 06:30 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-06-2014 08:57 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-06-2014 01:30 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You touch upon something that seems quite lost upon many jhawk. Imagine the combination of ESPN, the SEC and WVU in regards to pushing the SEC brand up into the Beltway. It isn't about how much clout WVU has in that area right now. It is about how much clout they would have after having the ESPN propaganda machine working in that direction as well as having the SEC brand backing them.

It seems to me to be a case of folks having a lack of vision in regards to what ESPN and the SEC could do with WVU.

H! the exact thing applies to the ACC and the B1G.
Right now the ACC and the B1G each are about equal in viewership in the NE. The ACC on the back of Notre Dame and the B1G on the broad shoulders of Penn State.
The ACC could use WVU as an old "eastern indy" to help "top" the B1G in the NE market. Of course the opposite is true and the B1G could bury the ACC in the NE with the inclusion of West Virginia.
I think that there is a real possibility that Delany's next move (if it is to 16) would be a play for a combination of West Virginia and KENTUCKY. It is what I would do.
Knowing that Kansas would not likely join the SEC, the B1G could swing back around and pick up Kansas and Missouri if they decided to go to 18.
Bill Stewart appears to have been correct when he stated that one of the three (ACC, SEC, or the B1G) would pick up West Virginia before realignment was over.

Look, I am going to assume you are being truthful in that you actually believe this. Generally we try not to troll each other here and this is coming from someone who loves to troll folks over on the main forum. To think though that the Big Ten would go with West Virginia and Kentucky....you don't understand the Big Ten perspective. I get it if you think it is a good idea but your perspective is very much different from the Big Ten perspective.

I have actually made mention in the past about how West Virginia in the Big Ten makes good sense in an athletic perspective. One East team and one West team would make for an easy division between four divisions. The combo of Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers and West Virginia is pretty sweet. I don't see it happening though and Kentucky just doesn't fit, sorry.

If the ACC was willing to take WVU though and if they were insistant on getting WVU instead of a third Texas program then I definitely could see it. I know JR will say no way to what I am about to say but ECU is a strong candidate for the one single G5 program that is left to get into the P5(P4). We all know the SEC desperately wants into North Carolina. If the ACC felt more strongly about continuing to counter the Big Ten in the Beltway then getting West Virginia is a very strong move for the ACC.

ECU to the SEC is as crazy of a conversation piece as UConn to the Big Ten is.
H1, Virginia Tech, Duke, Kansas and Oklahoma are the way for the Big 10 to get to 18. Then the SEC can take Virginia, North Carolina, Kansas State and Oklahoma State and look what we set up. There is your must see end to the season with in state rivals of the Big 10 and SEC facing off.

ECU to SEC = UConn to Big 10, that's fair.
(This post was last modified: 11-06-2014 11:38 PM by JRsec.)
11-06-2014 06:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jhawkmvp Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 443
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Kansas
Location: Over the Rainbow
Post: #651
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
I can't see WVU in the B1G due to their mediocre, or worse, academic and fan reputations (fair or not). B1G presidents just won't go for it. They would be a perfect fit for the B1G, if they checked those 2 boxes a little more positively. The B12 is getting a lot more exposure in the areas I mentioned and it has been a big positive about their addition. They are also a top 25 school in merchandising, so though they have a small state location, they have a lot of fans spread across the country. I think the B12 would really benefit if WVU can settle in as the #3 FB school behind Texas and OU in the B12. Their academic and fan rep (they have been great so far in the B12) is what is limiting their realignment options a bit. I do think WVU finds a home in the ACC or SEC if the B12 implodes. IMO they are the fourth most valuable school in the B12 to the national networks.
(This post was last modified: 11-07-2014 12:00 AM by jhawkmvp.)
11-06-2014 11:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,401
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 194
I Root For: Return To Stability
Location:
Post: #652
RE: If the SEC did expand again...
(11-04-2014 02:43 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-04-2014 02:34 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Using the theme of the networks parceling out the programs, it's possible that they'd split the difference between what the Big Ten and SEC would want. Both prefer dealing with flagship schools for historical and economic reasons. Therefore, we might see both each have a program from both the B12 and ACC, clue being in states where either hasn't had a presence, yet.

Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Illinois, Purdue, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Pennsylvania State, Rutgers, Maryland, Virginia

Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Missouri

Big Ten gets two AAU schools, one premium basketball power and further consolidation in the East, which is very needed. SEC gets two more premium programs and finally gets into NC.

The ACC picks up West Virginia and Iowa State as part of the B12 distribution, probably TCU and Baylor as well to access Texas recruiting and go to 16.

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State and Kansas State go to the PAC to round out the expansion.

ND renews its ACC deal and gets additional exposure in Texas.

The Big 10, SEC, and PAC would be happy with that, but I don't think the ACC would be too excited. Of all the scenarios I've tinkered with the 3 x 20 that builds the PAC, Big 10 and SEC into 3 regional conferences with four divisions of 5 regionally based schools each has been the best and strongest model for all surviving conferences. I don't think that any move that leaves one inherently disadvantaged conference is going to work. There are also some potentials with the 4 x 18 model. But if new markets and brands drive realignment and conference networks are indeed the ticket nothing builds them any better than the 3 x 20. The only problem is that there will be 5 victims, unless 1 of the conferences has 24 schools. To work in Cincinnati, Connecticut, and B.Y.U. you have to have two conferences of 24 and then things start to get thin.

I just don't see 20 teams in a conference. 16 may be the max. Therefore, those last two would be carefully picked, except for the PAC and ACC, who would settle for the best available candidates.

Perhaps VT for B1G and NC State for the SEC would do just as good of a job. NC, VA and Duke would stick together with their basketball-first mentality.


TAMU, Missouri, Oklahoma, Arkansas

Vanderbilt, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss St

Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn

NC State, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina


Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Kansas
Michigan State, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Maryland, Virginia Tech, Indiana


ISU, Louisville, Baylor, TCU
West Virginia, Pitt, Syracuse, Boston College
UVa, UNC, Wake Forest, Duke
Clemson, Georgia Tech, Florida State, Miami
11-07-2014 05:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #653
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
The Big Ten would Never do two divisions of eight if going to four divisions was possible. The Big Ten cares about scheduling between all of it's schools, especially the original 10. Having them split between two divisions of eight means scheduling between some of that original 10 would be very sparse. They would go with four divisions so go ahead and carve up that Big Ten into four divisions instead of two.
11-07-2014 08:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,401
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 194
I Root For: Return To Stability
Location:
Post: #654
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
KS, NE, IA, NU
MN, WI, IL, PU
IN, MSU, UM, OSU
PSU, RU, UMD, VT

At least two competitive programs in each division, in some years three.
11-07-2014 12:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #655
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(11-06-2014 06:30 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-06-2014 08:57 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-06-2014 01:30 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You touch upon something that seems quite lost upon many jhawk. Imagine the combination of ESPN, the SEC and WVU in regards to pushing the SEC brand up into the Beltway. It isn't about how much clout WVU has in that area right now. It is about how much clout they would have after having the ESPN propaganda machine working in that direction as well as having the SEC brand backing them.

It seems to me to be a case of folks having a lack of vision in regards to what ESPN and the SEC could do with WVU.

H! the exact thing applies to the ACC and the B1G.
Right now the ACC and the B1G each are about equal in viewership in the NE. The ACC on the back of Notre Dame and the B1G on the broad shoulders of Penn State.
The ACC could use WVU as an old "eastern indy" to help "top" the B1G in the NE market. Of course the opposite is true and the B1G could bury the ACC in the NE with the inclusion of West Virginia.
I think that there is a real possibility that Delany's next move (if it is to 16) would be a play for a combination of West Virginia and KENTUCKY. It is what I would do.
Knowing that Kansas would not likely join the SEC, the B1G could swing back around and pick up Kansas and Missouri if they decided to go to 18.
Bill Stewart appears to have been correct when he stated that one of the three (ACC, SEC, or the B1G) would pick up West Virginia before realignment was over.

Look, I am going to assume you are being truthful in that you actually believe this. Generally we try not to troll each other here and this is coming from someone who loves to troll folks over on the main forum. To think though that the Big Ten would go with West Virginia and Kentucky....you don't understand the Big Ten perspective. I get it if you think it is a good idea but your perspective is very much different from the Big Ten perspective.

I have actually made mention in the past about how West Virginia in the Big Ten makes good sense in an athletic perspective. One East team and one West team would make for an easy division between four divisions. The combo of Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers and West Virginia is pretty sweet. I don't see it happening though and Kentucky just doesn't fit, sorry.

If the ACC was willing to take WVU though and if they were insistant on getting WVU instead of a third Texas program then I definitely could see it. I know JR will say no way to what I am about to say but ECU is a strong candidate for the one single G5 program that is left to get into the P5(P4). We all know the SEC desperately wants into North Carolina. If the ACC felt more strongly about continuing to counter the Big Ten in the Beltway then getting West Virginia is a very strong move for the ACC.

ECU to the SEC is as crazy of a conversation piece as UConn to the Big Ten is.

I believe both are strategic moves.
Can you really explain Rutgers and Maryland?

You are correct in that I really don't understand the Big Ten perspective, but I do understand marketing and dynamics. West Virginia in the hands of the ACC or the SEC could do more damage to the B1G from a market standpoint than the embarrassment of the B1G for taking them in.
And Kentucky? Ego trip for Delany (he was able to get an ACC school, could he snag a SEC school too)? Attempt to keep up with the new ACC in hoops? A school that would look like a B1G school if the academics were just a little bit better? Looks good on the map? Pushes the borders of the Big Ten out to give the core schools a little breathing room? Take your pick.
If I were Delany and if I were going to 18 it would be with Kansas, Missouri, Kentucky and West Virginia.
11-07-2014 01:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,892
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #656
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(11-07-2014 05:37 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(11-04-2014 02:43 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-04-2014 02:34 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Using the theme of the networks parceling out the programs, it's possible that they'd split the difference between what the Big Ten and SEC would want. Both prefer dealing with flagship schools for historical and economic reasons. Therefore, we might see both each have a program from both the B12 and ACC, clue being in states where either hasn't had a presence, yet.

Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Illinois, Purdue, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Pennsylvania State, Rutgers, Maryland, Virginia

Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Missouri

Big Ten gets two AAU schools, one premium basketball power and further consolidation in the East, which is very needed. SEC gets two more premium programs and finally gets into NC.

The ACC picks up West Virginia and Iowa State as part of the B12 distribution, probably TCU and Baylor as well to access Texas recruiting and go to 16.

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State and Kansas State go to the PAC to round out the expansion.

ND renews its ACC deal and gets additional exposure in Texas.

The Big 10, SEC, and PAC would be happy with that, but I don't think the ACC would be too excited. Of all the scenarios I've tinkered with the 3 x 20 that builds the PAC, Big 10 and SEC into 3 regional conferences with four divisions of 5 regionally based schools each has been the best and strongest model for all surviving conferences. I don't think that any move that leaves one inherently disadvantaged conference is going to work. There are also some potentials with the 4 x 18 model. But if new markets and brands drive realignment and conference networks are indeed the ticket nothing builds them any better than the 3 x 20. The only problem is that there will be 5 victims, unless 1 of the conferences has 24 schools. To work in Cincinnati, Connecticut, and B.Y.U. you have to have two conferences of 24 and then things start to get thin.

I just don't see 20 teams in a conference. 16 may be the max. Therefore, those last two would be carefully picked, except for the PAC and ACC, who would settle for the best available candidates.

Perhaps VT for B1G and NC State for the SEC would do just as good of a job. NC, VA and Duke would stick together with their basketball-first mentality.


TAMU, Missouri, Oklahoma, Arkansas

Vanderbilt, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss St

Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn

NC State, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina


Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Kansas
Michigan State, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Maryland, Virginia Tech, Indiana


ISU, Louisville, Baylor, TCU
West Virginia, Pitt, Syracuse, Boston College
UVa, UNC, Wake Forest, Duke
Clemson, Georgia Tech, Florida State, Miami

Transic I would take that compromise any day of the week. I'd even take it the other way around but the geography wouldn't make as much sense.
(This post was last modified: 11-07-2014 01:43 PM by JRsec.)
11-07-2014 01:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,892
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #657
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(11-07-2014 01:42 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-06-2014 06:30 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-06-2014 08:57 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-06-2014 01:30 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You touch upon something that seems quite lost upon many jhawk. Imagine the combination of ESPN, the SEC and WVU in regards to pushing the SEC brand up into the Beltway. It isn't about how much clout WVU has in that area right now. It is about how much clout they would have after having the ESPN propaganda machine working in that direction as well as having the SEC brand backing them.

It seems to me to be a case of folks having a lack of vision in regards to what ESPN and the SEC could do with WVU.

H! the exact thing applies to the ACC and the B1G.
Right now the ACC and the B1G each are about equal in viewership in the NE. The ACC on the back of Notre Dame and the B1G on the broad shoulders of Penn State.
The ACC could use WVU as an old "eastern indy" to help "top" the B1G in the NE market. Of course the opposite is true and the B1G could bury the ACC in the NE with the inclusion of West Virginia.
I think that there is a real possibility that Delany's next move (if it is to 16) would be a play for a combination of West Virginia and KENTUCKY. It is what I would do.
Knowing that Kansas would not likely join the SEC, the B1G could swing back around and pick up Kansas and Missouri if they decided to go to 18.
Bill Stewart appears to have been correct when he stated that one of the three (ACC, SEC, or the B1G) would pick up West Virginia before realignment was over.

Look, I am going to assume you are being truthful in that you actually believe this. Generally we try not to troll each other here and this is coming from someone who loves to troll folks over on the main forum. To think though that the Big Ten would go with West Virginia and Kentucky....you don't understand the Big Ten perspective. I get it if you think it is a good idea but your perspective is very much different from the Big Ten perspective.

I have actually made mention in the past about how West Virginia in the Big Ten makes good sense in an athletic perspective. One East team and one West team would make for an easy division between four divisions. The combo of Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers and West Virginia is pretty sweet. I don't see it happening though and Kentucky just doesn't fit, sorry.

If the ACC was willing to take WVU though and if they were insistant on getting WVU instead of a third Texas program then I definitely could see it. I know JR will say no way to what I am about to say but ECU is a strong candidate for the one single G5 program that is left to get into the P5(P4). We all know the SEC desperately wants into North Carolina. If the ACC felt more strongly about continuing to counter the Big Ten in the Beltway then getting West Virginia is a very strong move for the ACC.

ECU to the SEC is as crazy of a conversation piece as UConn to the Big Ten is.

I believe both are strategic moves.
Can you really explain Rutgers and Maryland?

You are correct in that I really don't understand the Big Ten perspective, but I do understand marketing and dynamics. West Virginia in the hands of the ACC or the SEC could do more damage to the B1G from a market standpoint than the embarrassment of the B1G for taking them in.
And Kentucky? Ego trip for Delany (he was able to get an ACC school, could he snag a SEC school too)? Attempt to keep up with the new ACC in hoops? A school that would look like a B1G school if the academics were just a little bit better? Looks good on the map? Pushes the borders of the Big Ten out to give the core schools a little breathing room? Take your pick.
If I were Delany and if I were going to 18 it would be with Kansas, Missouri, Kentucky and West Virginia.

If Delany wanted an SEC school his most likely candidate to try for (outside of perhaps Missouri) would be Vanderbilt. But really do you believe that his ego is driving the decisions to take Maryland and Rutgers? I don't. He was building a bridge to Virginia and trying to isolate Syracuse.

Face it the grand slam for the Big 10 at 18 would be Virginia, Duke, North Carolina, and Notre Dame. The three run homer would be the same but replacing Notre Dame with Syracuse. Any of those two combinations nails down the Northeast and Beltway and maximizes the eyeballs. Maryland was not an attempt to raid a school from the ACC. It was an attempt to destabilize it. Nebraska was not an attempt to raid the Big 12. It was an obvious target that extended the footprint of the Big 10. And moreover if Delany had wanted Missouri they were ready. He passed, and for good reason. The Big 10 already had the St.Louis and Kansas City markets. There were more eyeballs and money to be made by taking Rutgers. It is a game of markets and money in which his rules dictate AAU status and preferably large state schools. He bent the rules for Nebraska. He will ignore the "large state" and "state" part to land Virginia, North Carolina and Duke. And I keep mentioning Duke because I don't see North Carolina going anywhere without them.
11-07-2014 02:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,892
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #658
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
In 1992 the SEC added South Carolina and Arkansas. The outlier was Arkansas. Why? Simply look at a map. South Carolina was due North of Georgia, and East of Tennessee. They fit within the footprint. Arkansas was a state beyond Louisiana and Mississippi. When the SEC added Texas A&M, Missouri was more of a natural fit than people realize. Again look at the map. A&M is roughly below Arkansas and close to Louisiana and Missouri is due north of Arkansas. Those two states extended the SEC footprint in a natural line. Texas and Baylor now fit within the SEC footprint. Oklahoma would extend the footprint a state beyond. North Carolina fits within the footprint. West Virgnia and Virginia fit somewhat but really extend it a state beyond.

If the SEC wants to consolidate withing its footprint there are many ways to do so, but only 1 that adds a new state. Any North Carolina school adds that state. If we expand West an Oklahoma and Kansas school expands that footprint. Any school that helps deliver DFW adds to our markets. If we expand East our options are a North Carolina school and preferably a Virginia school. West Virginia however would be a plus.

So I'd say our targets were Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, and Kansas State for new states to the West. Texas and Baylor or perhaps T.C.U. for the consolidation of the Texas market.

To the East our targets are North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, and West Virginia. Perhaps we go for Florida State to consolidate a large state.

Any combination of two of those would be good to 16. Any combination of 4 would be good to 18. The best to 16 would be North Carolina and Virginia Tech. The best to 18 would be North Carolina, Virginia Tech, Oklahoma and Kansas.

Realistically I think we will settle in between what is just good and what is best.
11-07-2014 02:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #659
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(11-07-2014 12:47 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  KS, NE, IA, NU
MN, WI, IL, PU
IN, MSU, UM, OSU
PSU, RU, UMD, VT

At least two competitive programs in each division, in some years three.

Close to what I would do but I would slip MSU over into the Wisconsin division and Purdue into the division with the two biggest brands in the Big Ten. Having Michigan State, Michigan and Ohio State all in the same division is a bad move for the Big Ten at this time.
11-07-2014 06:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #660
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(11-07-2014 01:42 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-06-2014 06:30 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(11-06-2014 08:57 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-06-2014 01:30 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You touch upon something that seems quite lost upon many jhawk. Imagine the combination of ESPN, the SEC and WVU in regards to pushing the SEC brand up into the Beltway. It isn't about how much clout WVU has in that area right now. It is about how much clout they would have after having the ESPN propaganda machine working in that direction as well as having the SEC brand backing them.

It seems to me to be a case of folks having a lack of vision in regards to what ESPN and the SEC could do with WVU.

H! the exact thing applies to the ACC and the B1G.
Right now the ACC and the B1G each are about equal in viewership in the NE. The ACC on the back of Notre Dame and the B1G on the broad shoulders of Penn State.
The ACC could use WVU as an old "eastern indy" to help "top" the B1G in the NE market. Of course the opposite is true and the B1G could bury the ACC in the NE with the inclusion of West Virginia.
I think that there is a real possibility that Delany's next move (if it is to 16) would be a play for a combination of West Virginia and KENTUCKY. It is what I would do.
Knowing that Kansas would not likely join the SEC, the B1G could swing back around and pick up Kansas and Missouri if they decided to go to 18.
Bill Stewart appears to have been correct when he stated that one of the three (ACC, SEC, or the B1G) would pick up West Virginia before realignment was over.

Look, I am going to assume you are being truthful in that you actually believe this. Generally we try not to troll each other here and this is coming from someone who loves to troll folks over on the main forum. To think though that the Big Ten would go with West Virginia and Kentucky....you don't understand the Big Ten perspective. I get it if you think it is a good idea but your perspective is very much different from the Big Ten perspective.

I have actually made mention in the past about how West Virginia in the Big Ten makes good sense in an athletic perspective. One East team and one West team would make for an easy division between four divisions. The combo of Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers and West Virginia is pretty sweet. I don't see it happening though and Kentucky just doesn't fit, sorry.

If the ACC was willing to take WVU though and if they were insistant on getting WVU instead of a third Texas program then I definitely could see it. I know JR will say no way to what I am about to say but ECU is a strong candidate for the one single G5 program that is left to get into the P5(P4). We all know the SEC desperately wants into North Carolina. If the ACC felt more strongly about continuing to counter the Big Ten in the Beltway then getting West Virginia is a very strong move for the ACC.

ECU to the SEC is as crazy of a conversation piece as UConn to the Big Ten is.

I believe both are strategic moves.
Can you really explain Rutgers and Maryland?

You are correct in that I really don't understand the Big Ten perspective, but I do understand marketing and dynamics. West Virginia in the hands of the ACC or the SEC could do more damage to the B1G from a market standpoint than the embarrassment of the B1G for taking them in.
And Kentucky? Ego trip for Delany (he was able to get an ACC school, could he snag a SEC school too)? Attempt to keep up with the new ACC in hoops? A school that would look like a B1G school if the academics were just a little bit better? Looks good on the map? Pushes the borders of the Big Ten out to give the core schools a little breathing room? Take your pick.
If I were Delany and if I were going to 18 it would be with Kansas, Missouri, Kentucky and West Virginia.

Look, I get why Kentucky and West Virginia look good for the Big Ten on an athletic level. I wont even bother trying to debate that because I agree. Why do Maryland and Rutgers look better for the Big Ten? Non-Athletic reasons obviously. Programs can be built more quickly than markets. Both Maryland and Rutgers also have strong recruiting grounds for both basketball and football. Kentucky and West Virginia? Not so much.
11-07-2014 06:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 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.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.