None of the Big 12 schools are worth what the right combo of NC/VA ACC schools are (adding another Florida's worth of people to the foot print)

I say wait it out and don't waste valuable slots on marginally valuable Big 12 teams.

(12-10-2014 10:54 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  None of the Big 12 schools are worth what the right combo of NC/VA ACC schools are (adding another Florida's worth of people to the foot print)

I say wait it out and don't waste valuable slots on marginally valuable Big 12 teams.

10th the only way I see us landing N.C. State and Virginia Tech now is if ESPN can convince the ACC of the viability of making room for Texas, Kansas, and Oklahoma. Notre Dame joining in full would be a plus. If they don't then a second Texas school or W.V.U. could make the 4th.

If, and a big if here, rationality and business sense prevailed here is what the SEC and ACC would look like:

SEC:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech

ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Duke, Louisville, North Carolina, Virginia,
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Wake Forest
Kansas, Miami, Oklahoma, Texas

The SEC gets its 19 million more viewers without having to upset the balance of anything and putting V.T. and S.C. in a position to compete annually keeping that division energized.

The ACC adds three football national brands to get the help they need the most. They add 33 million conservatively to their national audience, but more importantly gain the gravitas with which to compel viewing.

But, instead what we are getting is blowback from U.N.C., UVa, and Duke because they fear losing control. If that world view is not changed then my friend we are looking at adding OU and Kansas, or OU and West Virginia IMO.

********************************************************************************************************************************
Occam's Razor says this:
ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Clemson, Louisville, N.C. State, Wake Forest
Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Texas

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

Why is Chapel Hill so resistant to the swap approach? They know the SEC has Texas with A&M. They also know their greatest advantage is in exclusivity in North Carolina and Virginia. In their reasoning if the SEC obtained Virginia Tech and N.C. State the SEC adds nearly 19 million viewers. They know the SEC already has the Texas footprint so if they added it they would be in essence catching up, but by giving up exclusivity to North Carolina and Virginia they would be losing the viewer battle with the SEC by 19 million. Kansas and Oklahoma add little over 6 million between them. They also know that the SEC commands the attention of viewers. So in their minds yielding on North Carolina and Virginia places them in the inferior position with regard to the SEC in perpetuity. Therefore they are intransigent.

What I feel they are shortsighted about is the leverage they would have to get N.D. all in with the addition of Texas.

That is why I feel that to round out to 16 the most likely candidates for the SEC are still, like it or not, Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas with West Virginia as a possibility. Without question the best markets are in North Carolina and Virginia. But without question the best content is in Texas and Oklahoma. Second to that duo would be Florida State and Clemson, but ESPN can not afford to take them out of the ACC or they have no football to push there at all. So if the ACC remains intact with the hope of luring N.D. all in, then SEC expansion will come to the West and our dollar value will be boosted in both ESPN, the SECN, and CBS with the additions of Texas or Oklahoma for football, or Oklahoma and Kansas for football and hoops, or the possibility of a market add with a content add in Oklahoma and West Virginia, but I think the latter is on down the line in preference. Quite frankly from a SECN perspective adding all four would be the grand slam.

Remember Texas and OU either add to or match the SEC's revenue generation and attendance. Their fans travel well. They love football. Their fans tune in in proportions approximating those of SEC fans. All of this would be absent from the Tar Heels and Cavaliers or from the Wolfpack and the Hokies. All we get there is cable TV money. We won't get large football travel crowds. They will show up in Rupp and at the O'Connell Center but that is about it. I just think that the only reason the SEC has looked at those states is the current cable market or maybe out of some latent desire to rebuild the map of Dixie. The best and most profitable additions the SEC could make would be Texas and Oklahoma. If that is offensive to the Aggies I understand it, but it wouldn't stop a good business decision. Kansas and West Virginia wouldn't help attendance, but they are both profitable and one thing people don't give W.V.U. enough credit for is a decent basketball program.

So to 16 Texas and Oklahoma are ideal. To 18 add Kansas and West Virginia. Strategically adding all four to the SEC locks in the SEC's advantages in the TV world based on the only model that will not change, content. It is the smartest and safest move and it removes all competitive advantages left to either the PAC, Big 10 or ACC with regards to the SEC's market dominance. And some decent basketball venues to travel to within Kentucky's range would really help the Wildcats feel more secure with regards to the upside of hoops in the SEC.

If the dissolution of the Big 12 came to past, I would like to see TCU in the SEC just based on my natural preference. Also, I would be pleased to see ECU join the SEC to spite the ACC North Carolina schools. Otherwise, I would be satisfied to see all the P5 conferences remain as they are. Of course, I know that there shall be movement, but a little blind dream never hurts anyone.

Seriously however, I see Kansas heading to the BIG 10, Oklahoma to the SEC, and Texas (in their power and arrogance) heading their historic founding (history wise) route of Independence. As for the rest, a mad scramble ensures and I wouldn't be surprised if the PAC 12 plucks some if the ravaged BIG 12 cannot backfill with AAC schools or the Basken Robbins flavors of the month.

Why would Texas and OU leave a conference where, historically, they've been the top dogs to go to the SEC where they'd have to fight like dogs to win?

It's easier for them to become conference champion where they are and have a spot in the Final Four than move to the SEC.

Not sure it's worth any more money than the Big12 and you'd have to deal with the LHN - another issue.

(12-11-2014 01:00 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  Why would Texas and OU leave a conference where, historically, they've been the top dogs to go to the SEC where they'd have to fight like dogs to win?

It's easier for them to become conference champion where they are and have a spot in the Final Four than move to the SEC.

Not sure it's worth any more money than the Big12 and you'd have to deal with the LHN - another issue.

Because who they really want to play are no longer in the Big 12, the fan bases of OU and UT are already in mild revolt over the home schedules, and for size, mission, and academics they have few peers in the Big 12. While Texas's academics could place them anywhere, they have cultural needs as well. OU's academics are right at the mean for the SEC. And the money would be significantly more.

You have to look at the division they would help to create to see the big picture:
Arkansas (SWC), Kansas (Big 12), Missouri (Big 12), Oklahoma (Big 12), Texas (SWC), Texas A&M (SWC). They have 3 non conference games with which to schedule the likes of Baylor, Texas Tech, Rice, or T.C.U.. There is almost sure to be a mandated game with the ACC and it could be against N.D. if they wished. OU could schedule OSU out of conference as long as they play Texas every year. Both would have more solid recruiting trips to Florida because of the move, not to mention also entrance into Louisiana, Alabama, and Georgia for recruits.

Those are things they presently don't enjoy, or enjoy as much in the Big 12 and won't be able to find in the Big 10. As for the LHN ESPN could handle that anyway they wished. It could be converted to the headquarters for coverage of the SEC West while Charlotte is dedicated to the SEC East.

(12-11-2014 01:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-11-2014 01:00 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  Why would Texas and OU leave a conference where, historically, they've been the top dogs to go to the SEC where they'd have to fight like dogs to win?

It's easier for them to become conference champion where they are and have a spot in the Final Four than move to the SEC.

Not sure it's worth any more money than the Big12 and you'd have to deal with the LHN - another issue.

Because who they really want to play are no longer in the Big 12, the fan bases of OU and UT are already in mild revolt over the home schedules, and for size, mission, and academics they have few peers in the Big 12. While Texas's academics could place them anywhere, they have cultural needs as well. OU's academics are right at the mean for the SEC. And the money would be significantly more.

You have to look at the division they would help to create to see the big picture:
Arkansas (SWC), Kansas (Big 12), Missouri (Big 12), Oklahoma (Big 12), Texas (SWC), Texas A&M (SWC). They have 3 non conference games with which to schedule the likes of Baylor, Texas Tech, Rice, or T.C.U.. There is almost sure to be a mandated game with the ACC and it could be against N.D. if they wished. OU could schedule OSU out of conference as long as they play Texas every year. Both would have more solid recruiting trips to Florida because of the move, not to mention also entrance into Louisiana, Alabama, and Georgia for recruits.

Those are things they presently don't enjoy, or enjoy as much in the Big 12 and won't be able to find in the Big 10. As for the LHN ESPN could handle that anyway they wished. It could be converted to the headquarters for coverage of the SEC West while Charlotte is dedicated to the SEC East.

Very good points.

that's fine for our message board conjecture but I think in the real world, the idea that OU and UT can simply abandon their baggage (OSU/TTU/BU/TCU) to fend for themselves is unrealistic. KU might be able to do it but OU and UT? Their baggage schools may not be popular to the other P5 but they have a lot of power in their legislatures by their combined efforts.

Nothing is impossible but if those 2 managed to somehow shake their tail coat riders free, no one would be more shocked than me

(12-11-2014 02:07 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  that's fine for our message board conjecture but I think in the real world, the idea that OU and UT can simply abandon their baggage (OSU/TTU/BU/TCU) to fend for themselves is unrealistic. KU might be able to do it but OU and UT? Their baggage schools may not be popular to the other P5 but they have a lot of power in their legislatures by their combined efforts.

Nothing is impossible but if those 2 managed to somehow shake their tail coat riders free, no one would be more shocked than me

Duly noted 10th, but I'm beginning to believe that anything from the East is blocked by ESPN in hopes of landing the Irish full time. I can't imagine what would ensue if the Big 12 actually takes Cincinnati and B.Y.U., or even Memphis and Tulane. All future realignment coming from the G5 might mean that the SEC finishes out with E.C.U. and another, possibly U.C.F. which would give most conference teams a presence in South Florida, plus it is the home of Disneyworld and a destination game. If we had to upgrade and develop a couple of schools those would be my choice.

But I don't think the ACC will disintegrate, I don't believe the Big 12 will add two or more G5 games, and I do believe that eventually the SEC's final two (preferably) will come from the West. If Texas goes ACC and N.D. joins in full there is your 16 for them. Oklahoma and Kansas finish out the SEC nicely. Oklahoma State and West Virginia are not my first choice but they would be acceptable. We'll just wait and see, but I don't think once the Big 12 announces that they are not expanding we will have to wait too long. Maybe 2 or 3 years tops.

(12-10-2014 02:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-10-2014 10:54 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  None of the Big 12 schools are worth what the right combo of NC/VA ACC schools are (adding another Florida's worth of people to the foot print)

I say wait it out and don't waste valuable slots on marginally valuable Big 12 teams.

10th the only way I see us landing N.C. State and Virginia Tech now is if ESPN can convince the ACC of the viability of making room for Texas, Kansas, and Oklahoma. Notre Dame joining in full would be a plus. If they don't then a second Texas school or W.V.U. could make the 4th.

If, and a big if here, rationality and business sense prevailed here is what the SEC and ACC would look like:

SEC:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech

ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Duke, Louisville, North Carolina, Virginia,
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Wake Forest
Kansas, Miami, Oklahoma, Texas

The SEC gets its 19 million more viewers without having to upset the balance of anything and putting V.T. and S.C. in a position to compete annually keeping that division energized.

The ACC adds three football national brands to get the help they need the most. They add 33 million conservatively to their national audience, but more importantly gain the gravitas with which to compel viewing.

But, instead what we are getting is blowback from U.N.C., UVa, and Duke because they fear losing control. If that world view is not changed then my friend we are looking at adding OU and Kansas, or OU and West Virginia IMO.

********************************************************************************************************************************
Occam's Razor says this:
ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Clemson, Louisville, N.C. State, Wake Forest
Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Texas

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

Why is Chapel Hill so resistant to the swap approach? They know the SEC has Texas with A&M. They also know their greatest advantage is in exclusivity in North Carolina and Virginia. In their reasoning if the SEC obtained Virginia Tech and N.C. State the SEC adds nearly 19 million viewers. They know the SEC already has the Texas footprint so if they added it they would be in essence catching up, but by giving up exclusivity to North Carolina and Virginia they would be losing the viewer battle with the SEC by 19 million. Kansas and Oklahoma add little over 6 million between them. They also know that the SEC commands the attention of viewers. So in their minds yielding on North Carolina and Virginia places them in the inferior position with regard to the SEC in perpetuity. Therefore they are intransigent.

What I feel they are shortsighted about is the leverage they would have to get N.D. all in with the addition of Texas.

That is why I feel that to round out to 16 the most likely candidates for the SEC are still, like it or not, Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas with West Virginia as a possibility. Without question the best markets are in North Carolina and Virginia. But without question the best content is in Texas and Oklahoma. Second to that duo would be Florida State and Clemson, but ESPN can not afford to take them out of the ACC or they have no football to push there at all. So if the ACC remains intact with the hope of luring N.D. all in, then SEC expansion will come to the West and our dollar value will be boosted in both ESPN, the SECN, and CBS with the additions of Texas or Oklahoma for football, or Oklahoma and Kansas for football and hoops, or the possibility of a market add with a content add in Oklahoma and West Virginia, but I think the latter is on down the line in preference. Quite frankly from a SECN perspective adding all four would be the grand slam.

Remember Texas and OU either add to or match the SEC's revenue generation and attendance. Their fans travel well. They love football. Their fans tune in in proportions approximating those of SEC fans. All of this would be absent from the Tar Heels and Cavaliers or from the Wolfpack and the Hokies. All we get there is cable TV money. We won't get large football travel crowds. They will show up in Rupp and at the O'Connell Center but that is about it. I just think that the only reason the SEC has looked at those states is the current cable market or maybe out of some latent desire to rebuild the map of Dixie. The best and most profitable additions the SEC could make would be Texas and Oklahoma. If that is offensive to the Aggies I understand it, but it wouldn't stop a good business decision. Kansas and West Virginia wouldn't help attendance, but they are both profitable and one thing people don't give W.V.U. enough credit for is a decent basketball program.

So to 16 Texas and Oklahoma are ideal. To 18 add Kansas and West Virginia. Strategically adding all four to the SEC locks in the SEC's advantages in the TV world based on the only model that will not change, content. It is the smartest and safest move and it removes all competitive advantages left to either the PAC, Big 10 or ACC with regards to the SEC's market dominance. And some decent basketball venues to travel to within Kentucky's range would really help the Wildcats feel more secure with regards to the upside of hoops in the SEC.

The strictly geographic alignment would be:

for the B1G to add:
Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, and Iowa State for 18

the SEC to add:
Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Oklahoma State, and Oklahoma for 18

The PAC stays at 12.

The ACC adds:
West Virginia (full) and Texas (partial/ND deal-5 games)

That's really simple!

(12-11-2014 05:09 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(12-10-2014 02:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-10-2014 10:54 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  None of the Big 12 schools are worth what the right combo of NC/VA ACC schools are (adding another Florida's worth of people to the foot print)

I say wait it out and don't waste valuable slots on marginally valuable Big 12 teams.

10th the only way I see us landing N.C. State and Virginia Tech now is if ESPN can convince the ACC of the viability of making room for Texas, Kansas, and Oklahoma. Notre Dame joining in full would be a plus. If they don't then a second Texas school or W.V.U. could make the 4th.

If, and a big if here, rationality and business sense prevailed here is what the SEC and ACC would look like:

SEC:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech

ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Duke, Louisville, North Carolina, Virginia,
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Wake Forest
Kansas, Miami, Oklahoma, Texas

The SEC gets its 19 million more viewers without having to upset the balance of anything and putting V.T. and S.C. in a position to compete annually keeping that division energized.

The ACC adds three football national brands to get the help they need the most. They add 33 million conservatively to their national audience, but more importantly gain the gravitas with which to compel viewing.

But, instead what we are getting is blowback from U.N.C., UVa, and Duke because they fear losing control. If that world view is not changed then my friend we are looking at adding OU and Kansas, or OU and West Virginia IMO.

********************************************************************************************************************************
Occam's Razor says this:
ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Duke, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Clemson, Louisville, N.C. State, Wake Forest
Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Texas

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

Why is Chapel Hill so resistant to the swap approach? They know the SEC has Texas with A&M. They also know their greatest advantage is in exclusivity in North Carolina and Virginia. In their reasoning if the SEC obtained Virginia Tech and N.C. State the SEC adds nearly 19 million viewers. They know the SEC already has the Texas footprint so if they added it they would be in essence catching up, but by giving up exclusivity to North Carolina and Virginia they would be losing the viewer battle with the SEC by 19 million. Kansas and Oklahoma add little over 6 million between them. They also know that the SEC commands the attention of viewers. So in their minds yielding on North Carolina and Virginia places them in the inferior position with regard to the SEC in perpetuity. Therefore they are intransigent.

What I feel they are shortsighted about is the leverage they would have to get N.D. all in with the addition of Texas.

That is why I feel that to round out to 16 the most likely candidates for the SEC are still, like it or not, Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas with West Virginia as a possibility. Without question the best markets are in North Carolina and Virginia. But without question the best content is in Texas and Oklahoma. Second to that duo would be Florida State and Clemson, but ESPN can not afford to take them out of the ACC or they have no football to push there at all. So if the ACC remains intact with the hope of luring N.D. all in, then SEC expansion will come to the West and our dollar value will be boosted in both ESPN, the SECN, and CBS with the additions of Texas or Oklahoma for football, or Oklahoma and Kansas for football and hoops, or the possibility of a market add with a content add in Oklahoma and West Virginia, but I think the latter is on down the line in preference. Quite frankly from a SECN perspective adding all four would be the grand slam.

Remember Texas and OU either add to or match the SEC's revenue generation and attendance. Their fans travel well. They love football. Their fans tune in in proportions approximating those of SEC fans. All of this would be absent from the Tar Heels and Cavaliers or from the Wolfpack and the Hokies. All we get there is cable TV money. We won't get large football travel crowds. They will show up in Rupp and at the O'Connell Center but that is about it. I just think that the only reason the SEC has looked at those states is the current cable market or maybe out of some latent desire to rebuild the map of Dixie. The best and most profitable additions the SEC could make would be Texas and Oklahoma. If that is offensive to the Aggies I understand it, but it wouldn't stop a good business decision. Kansas and West Virginia wouldn't help attendance, but they are both profitable and one thing people don't give W.V.U. enough credit for is a decent basketball program.

So to 16 Texas and Oklahoma are ideal. To 18 add Kansas and West Virginia. Strategically adding all four to the SEC locks in the SEC's advantages in the TV world based on the only model that will not change, content. It is the smartest and safest move and it removes all competitive advantages left to either the PAC, Big 10 or ACC with regards to the SEC's market dominance. And some decent basketball venues to travel to within Kentucky's range would really help the Wildcats feel more secure with regards to the upside of hoops in the SEC.

The strictly geographic alignment would be:

for the B1G to add:
Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, and Iowa State for 18

the SEC to add:
Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Oklahoma State, and Oklahoma for 18

The PAC stays at 12.

The ACC adds:
West Virginia (full) and Texas (partial/ND deal-5 games)

That's really simple!

Nice troll. Nobody's happy with that but the ACC. Although I have no problem with the ACC get.

We'll keep Missouri, take Kansas and Oklahoma and stop at 16. If the Big 10 has to have Kansas then we'll look at Baylor.

Troll? You're the one that brought up Occam's razor!

(12-11-2014 05:18 PM)XLance Wrote:  Troll? You're the one that brought up Occam's razor!

X... I do not question your ACC comments. To move Missouri is not going to happen...ever. You apparently do not understand the SEC. I would love Kansas and OU to come to the SEC. If we get a couple eastern schools, fine. OU and KU would be great. Best BB west of the Mississippi and a great FB brand. We must beat the B1G to the draw.

(12-11-2014 08:29 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(12-11-2014 05:18 PM)XLance Wrote:  Troll? You're the one that brought up Occam's razor!

X... I do not question your ACC comments. To move Missouri is not going to happen...ever. You apparently do not understand the SEC. I would love Kansas and OU to come to the SEC. If we get a couple eastern schools, fine. OU and KU would be great. Best BB west of the Mississippi and a great FB brand. We must beat the B1G to the draw.

I like our chances Medic. Think about it this way, the Big 10 picked up Penn State while Jo Pa's regime was intact. Paterno hated the Old Big East crowd and would not have followed them to the ACC. The SEC was not a possibility so the Big 10 was his only haven. Nebraska did not have the PAC connections that Oklahoma does, they were on an Island and too remote for the SEC at the time of their move. They knew the Big 10 was their only haven. But both of those were great gets for the Big 10. When the Big 10 goes up against the ACC in the East the ACC lands Syracuse, Boston College and Pittsburgh, (and gain N.D. as a partial eventually). The Big 10 is only able to get Rutgers, a great school to be sure but hardly a sports hub. They pick up a cash strapped Maryland, but whiff on Virginia and North Carolina.

The SEC lands Texas A&M and has a plum in Mizzou drop right in their lap. If the Big 12 starts to implode I like our chances to land both OU, and Kansas. The Horns may opt SEC before it's over but really I would hope they take an N.D. deal in the ACC. But if they do take that there won't be any movement of T.C.U. and Baylor to the ACC. Why? Texas will only be obligated for 5 ACC games a year. They will have 7 slots with which to play the Baylor's, Tech's, and Frog's of the world. Why should the ACC pay for them? If Texas goes ACC then the SEC stops at 16. If the Horns want into the SEC and we have a shot at getting Kansas too, then we might well go to 18 to snag Oklahoma in the process. If we do that 4th could be any of Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, or West Virginia.

If UT and OU can shake loose the parasites and go together on their own, I think they get with KU and call up the Big 10. It's what their decision makers really want and their fans will like winning more than not winning and they're already used to the idea of playing midwest plains schools. Plus it would be a strong western division in both FB and BB:

Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas/Nebraska/Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota/Northwestern/Illinois (Throw in Uconn to the East for symmetry)

Watch what happens when Arkansas, the last place SEC West team, runs an absolute train on UT in their bowl game. The tone from UT won't be "well that was enjoyable to play an old rival, I wish we could play them every year!" No, thats not UT, it'll be more like "Bunch of SEC cheaters! I hope we stay as far from that hillbilly cesspool as possible and refuse to play them ever again!"

(12-12-2014 11:20 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  If UT and OU can shake loose the parasites and go together on their own, I think they get with KU and call up the Big 10. It's what their decision makers really want and their fans will like winning more than not winning and they're already used to the idea of playing midwest plains schools. Plus it would be a strong western division in both FB and BB:

Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas/Nebraska/Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota/Northwestern/Illinois (Throw in Uconn to the East for symmetry)

Watch what happens when Arkansas, the last place SEC West team, runs an absolute train on UT in their bowl game. The tone from UT won't be "well that was enjoyable to play an old rival, I wish we could play them every year!" No, thats not UT, it'll be more like "Bunch of SEC cheaters! I hope we stay as far from that hillbilly cesspool as possible and refuse to play them ever again!"

And if Arkansas does run over them that is exactly what you will hear from the UT fans. But their administration is not so stupid as to hand over the state to A&M by going to the Big 10. If they go elsewhere it will either be to the ACC (ESPN) or the PAC (if ESPN gains rights), or the SEC (ESPN), but they will not go to the Big 10 (FOX) as ESPN owns them until 2031 and the breaking of the agreement has to be mutual according to the contract language. And for the average Texan Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, and yes Iowa, might as well be on the moon. Texans gripe about Ames already, do you really think they would be happy with Ames x 4? Not even if Oklahoma shared the pain! Plus 10th if the Austin crowd wants to complain about playing the rustic folk, why the heck do they keep Tech and O.S.U.? No school in the SEC ever smeared human feces on someone's travel bus like they did in Lubbock. That kind of behavior is usually expected at another Big 12 destination much further to the North and East.

But let's look at this from your tact. Texas can't go to the PAC because they would be last in academics among the California schools and that would really sting their pretentious egos, as would the fact that the California schools will consider them to be the "crude" hicks. They'll have a hard time going to the ACC where everyone cares about basketball and the Research Triangle crowd will treat them like the nouveau riche cowboys that they are. If they go to the Big 10 the Midwesterners won't regard them at all. They will never crack the glass ceiling of the old boys club in the Big 10. They will be treated politely but ignored. The Southeast is the only place that would treat them like family, like the family ahole to be sure, but still like family. And personally the only school I have less patience with is Oklahoma. They aren't as cultured as Texas, no better than the mean of the SEC in education, and in many ways are just as pretentious as Austin but with much less reason to be. But both would be treated far better, and find nicer fan bases in the SEC than they will find elsewhere. And having lived for 7 years in the Big 10 country, and having lived on the West coast, and having traveled the Carolina's and I 95 corridor extensively I think I have a pretty good feel for this. BTW, we have family in Madison. They seldom think of the South except when the pecan harvest comes in. They live in a world where the Eastern boundary of the U.S. is NYC the Southern Boundary is Chicago, St. Louis is an excursion into wild country and the Dakota's are the Western boundary. So Texas might as well be next to Argentina.

They tolerate Tech because they have to (state politics) and because they're almost always a W for UT in every sport and a yes vote in the boardroom for whatever UT wants at the moment...think of them as the Smithers to the UT Burns (if Smithers was played by Cletus)

But you do bring up a good point that the SEC is pretty much the only place they'd be culturally tolerated even if they believe they're far too good for us. Though of course a lot of that attitude is hide their very real fear about the SEC being that they will not be in charge, given any preferential treatment and they will not only not be able to dominate in any sport but will in fact suffer MEDIOCRE SEASONS in many of them (which is far more damage to their egos than the folks at Stanford and Berkeley not inviting them to pre-game cheese and wine tasting)

Maybe I'm wrong but I've been around these folks for decades and I know their folks in charge are very much of the mind set "we know whats best for you fans" and will aim for the PAC or B1G whether the fans like it or not.

(12-12-2014 04:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-12-2014 11:20 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  If UT and OU can shake loose the parasites and go together on their own, I think they get with KU and call up the Big 10. It's what their decision makers really want and their fans will like winning more than not winning and they're already used to the idea of playing midwest plains schools. Plus it would be a strong western division in both FB and BB:

Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas/Nebraska/Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota/Northwestern/Illinois (Throw in Uconn to the East for symmetry)

Watch what happens when Arkansas, the last place SEC West team, runs an absolute train on UT in their bowl game. The tone from UT won't be "well that was enjoyable to play an old rival, I wish we could play them every year!" No, thats not UT, it'll be more like "Bunch of SEC cheaters! I hope we stay as far from that hillbilly cesspool as possible and refuse to play them ever again!"

And if Arkansas does run over them that is exactly what you will hear from the UT fans. But their administration is not so stupid as to hand over the state to A&M by going to the Big 10. If they go elsewhere it will either be to the ACC (ESPN) or the PAC (if ESPN gains rights), or the SEC (ESPN), but they will not go to the Big 10 (FOX) as ESPN owns them until 2031 and the breaking of the agreement has to be mutual according to the contract language. And for the average Texan Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, and yes Iowa, might as well be on the moon. Texans gripe about Ames already, do you really think they would be happy with Ames x 4? Not even if Oklahoma shared the pain! Plus 10th if the Austin crowd wants to complain about playing the rustic folk, why the heck do they keep Tech and O.S.U.? No school in the SEC ever smeared human feces on someone's travel bus like they did in Lubbock. That kind of behavior is usually expected at another Big 12 destination much further to the North and East.

But let's look at this from your tact. Texas can't go to the PAC because they would be last in academics among the California schools and that would really sting their pretentious egos, as would the fact that the California schools will consider them to be the "crude" hicks. They'll have a hard time going to the ACC where everyone cares about basketball and the Research Triangle crowd will treat them like the nouveau riche cowboys that they are. If they go to the Big 10 the Midwesterners won't regard them at all. They will never crack the glass ceiling of the old boys club in the Big 10. They will be treated politely but ignored. The Southeast is the only place that would treat them like family, like the family ahole to be sure, but still like family. And personally the only school I have less patience with is Oklahoma. They aren't as cultured as Texas, no better than the mean of the SEC in education, and in many ways are just as pretentious as Austin but with much less reason to be. But both would be treated far better, and find nicer fan bases in the SEC than they will find elsewhere. And having lived for 7 years in the Big 10 country, and having lived on the West coast, and having traveled the Carolina's and I 95 corridor extensively I think I have a pretty good feel for this. BTW, we have family in Madison. They seldom think of the South except when the pecan harvest comes in. They live in a world where the Eastern boundary of the U.S. is NYC the Southern Boundary is Chicago, St. Louis is an excursion into wild country and the Dakota's are the Western boundary. So Texas might as well be next to Argentina.

And after all of the talk by the OU folks regarding the fact that OU will never play in the SEC because of our poor academics and corruption, Stoops has the nerve to grab a player Missouri kicked off the team...DGB. A druggie and woman abuser...tells me all I need to know about the high principles which prevents OU from coming to the SEC. It is a darn shame too, as it would be a nice fit.

(12-12-2014 04:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-12-2014 11:20 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  If UT and OU can shake loose the parasites and go together on their own, I think they get with KU and call up the Big 10. It's what their decision makers really want and their fans will like winning more than not winning and they're already used to the idea of playing midwest plains schools. Plus it would be a strong western division in both FB and BB:

Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas/Nebraska/Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota/Northwestern/Illinois (Throw in Uconn to the East for symmetry)

Watch what happens when Arkansas, the last place SEC West team, runs an absolute train on UT in their bowl game. The tone from UT won't be "well that was enjoyable to play an old rival, I wish we could play them every year!" No, thats not UT, it'll be more like "Bunch of SEC cheaters! I hope we stay as far from that hillbilly cesspool as possible and refuse to play them ever again!"

And if Arkansas does run over them that is exactly what you will hear from the UT fans. But their administration is not so stupid as to hand over the state to A&M by going to the Big 10. If they go elsewhere it will either be to the ACC (ESPN) or the PAC (if ESPN gains rights), or the SEC (ESPN), but they will not go to the Big 10 (FOX) as ESPN owns them until 2031 and the breaking of the agreement has to be mutual according to the contract language. And for the average Texan Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, and yes Iowa, might as well be on the moon. Texans gripe about Ames already, do you really think they would be happy with Ames x 4? Not even if Oklahoma shared the pain! Plus 10th if the Austin crowd wants to complain about playing the rustic folk, why the heck do they keep Tech and O.S.U.? No school in the SEC ever smeared human feces on someone's travel bus like they did in Lubbock. That kind of behavior is usually expected at another Big 12 destination much further to the North and East.

But let's look at this from your tact. Texas can't go to the PAC because they would be last in academics among the California schools and that would really sting their pretentious egos, as would the fact that the California schools will consider them to be the "crude" hicks. They'll have a hard time going to the ACC where everyone cares about basketball and the Research Triangle crowd will treat them like the nouveau riche cowboys that they are. If they go to the Big 10 the Midwesterners won't regard them at all. They will never crack the glass ceiling of the old boys club in the Big 10. They will be treated politely but ignored. The Southeast is the only place that would treat them like family, like the family ahole to be sure, but still like family. And personally the only school I have less patience with is Oklahoma. They aren't as cultured as Texas, no better than the mean of the SEC in education, and in many ways are just as pretentious as Austin but with much less reason to be. But both would be treated far better, and find nicer fan bases in the SEC than they will find elsewhere. And having lived for 7 years in the Big 10 country, and having lived on the West coast, and having traveled the Carolina's and I 95 corridor extensively I think I have a pretty good feel for this. BTW, we have family in Madison. They seldom think of the South except when the pecan harvest comes in. They live in a world where the Eastern boundary of the U.S. is NYC the Southern Boundary is Chicago, St. Louis is an excursion into wild country and the Dakota's are the Western boundary. So Texas might as well be next to Argentina.

But I don't think that's a form of existence the Longhorns would be comfortable subjecting themselves too. UT feels it has as much if not more leverage than Notre Dame, a will try and a deal similar to the Irish. Even if the ACC wouldn't give them one, I'm sure the B12 would readily capitulate. The 40 Acres only care about familial perspective as it relates to fan satisfaction and football schedules.

(12-13-2014 03:03 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(12-12-2014 04:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-12-2014 11:20 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  If UT and OU can shake loose the parasites and go together on their own, I think they get with KU and call up the Big 10. It's what their decision makers really want and their fans will like winning more than not winning and they're already used to the idea of playing midwest plains schools. Plus it would be a strong western division in both FB and BB:

Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas/Nebraska/Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota/Northwestern/Illinois (Throw in Uconn to the East for symmetry)

Watch what happens when Arkansas, the last place SEC West team, runs an absolute train on UT in their bowl game. The tone from UT won't be "well that was enjoyable to play an old rival, I wish we could play them every year!" No, thats not UT, it'll be more like "Bunch of SEC cheaters! I hope we stay as far from that hillbilly cesspool as possible and refuse to play them ever again!"

And if Arkansas does run over them that is exactly what you will hear from the UT fans. But their administration is not so stupid as to hand over the state to A&M by going to the Big 10. If they go elsewhere it will either be to the ACC (ESPN) or the PAC (if ESPN gains rights), or the SEC (ESPN), but they will not go to the Big 10 (FOX) as ESPN owns them until 2031 and the breaking of the agreement has to be mutual according to the contract language. And for the average Texan Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, and yes Iowa, might as well be on the moon. Texans gripe about Ames already, do you really think they would be happy with Ames x 4? Not even if Oklahoma shared the pain! Plus 10th if the Austin crowd wants to complain about playing the rustic folk, why the heck do they keep Tech and O.S.U.? No school in the SEC ever smeared human feces on someone's travel bus like they did in Lubbock. That kind of behavior is usually expected at another Big 12 destination much further to the North and East.

But let's look at this from your tact. Texas can't go to the PAC because they would be last in academics among the California schools and that would really sting their pretentious egos, as would the fact that the California schools will consider them to be the "crude" hicks. They'll have a hard time going to the ACC where everyone cares about basketball and the Research Triangle crowd will treat them like the nouveau riche cowboys that they are. If they go to the Big 10 the Midwesterners won't regard them at all. They will never crack the glass ceiling of the old boys club in the Big 10. They will be treated politely but ignored. The Southeast is the only place that would treat them like family, like the family ahole to be sure, but still like family. And personally the only school I have less patience with is Oklahoma. They aren't as cultured as Texas, no better than the mean of the SEC in education, and in many ways are just as pretentious as Austin but with much less reason to be. But both would be treated far better, and find nicer fan bases in the SEC than they will find elsewhere. And having lived for 7 years in the Big 10 country, and having lived on the West coast, and having traveled the Carolina's and I 95 corridor extensively I think I have a pretty good feel for this. BTW, we have family in Madison. They seldom think of the South except when the pecan harvest comes in. They live in a world where the Eastern boundary of the U.S. is NYC the Southern Boundary is Chicago, St. Louis is an excursion into wild country and the Dakota's are the Western boundary. So Texas might as well be next to Argentina.

But I don't think that's a form of existence the Longhorns would be comfortable subjecting themselves too. UT feels it has as much if not more leverage than Notre Dame, a will try and a deal similar to the Irish. Even if the ACC wouldn't give them one, I'm sure the B12 would readily capitulate. The 40 Acres only care about familial perspective as it relates to fan satisfaction and football schedules.

I agree if they can get a special deal in the ACC that it would appeal to them and likely assuage any qualms they may have over having the so called wine and cheese crowd tolerate them. It would probably make all involved happier if they took it. The SEC could still expand West without them. OU and Kansas, OU and WVU, even WVU and Kansas. Even if we still took 4 it would work, but would not be as profitable. We could take that second Texas school, OU, WVU, and Kansas. or if we had to OSU, OU, WVU, and Kansas.

(12-13-2014 10:39 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-13-2014 03:03 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(12-12-2014 04:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-12-2014 11:20 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  If UT and OU can shake loose the parasites and go together on their own, I think they get with KU and call up the Big 10. It's what their decision makers really want and their fans will like winning more than not winning and they're already used to the idea of playing midwest plains schools. Plus it would be a strong western division in both FB and BB:

Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas/Nebraska/Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota/Northwestern/Illinois (Throw in Uconn to the East for symmetry)

Watch what happens when Arkansas, the last place SEC West team, runs an absolute train on UT in their bowl game. The tone from UT won't be "well that was enjoyable to play an old rival, I wish we could play them every year!" No, thats not UT, it'll be more like "Bunch of SEC cheaters! I hope we stay as far from that hillbilly cesspool as possible and refuse to play them ever again!"

And if Arkansas does run over them that is exactly what you will hear from the UT fans. But their administration is not so stupid as to hand over the state to A&M by going to the Big 10. If they go elsewhere it will either be to the ACC (ESPN) or the PAC (if ESPN gains rights), or the SEC (ESPN), but they will not go to the Big 10 (FOX) as ESPN owns them until 2031 and the breaking of the agreement has to be mutual according to the contract language. And for the average Texan Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, and yes Iowa, might as well be on the moon. Texans gripe about Ames already, do you really think they would be happy with Ames x 4? Not even if Oklahoma shared the pain! Plus 10th if the Austin crowd wants to complain about playing the rustic folk, why the heck do they keep Tech and O.S.U.? No school in the SEC ever smeared human feces on someone's travel bus like they did in Lubbock. That kind of behavior is usually expected at another Big 12 destination much further to the North and East.

But let's look at this from your tact. Texas can't go to the PAC because they would be last in academics among the California schools and that would really sting their pretentious egos, as would the fact that the California schools will consider them to be the "crude" hicks. They'll have a hard time going to the ACC where everyone cares about basketball and the Research Triangle crowd will treat them like the nouveau riche cowboys that they are. If they go to the Big 10 the Midwesterners won't regard them at all. They will never crack the glass ceiling of the old boys club in the Big 10. They will be treated politely but ignored. The Southeast is the only place that would treat them like family, like the family ahole to be sure, but still like family. And personally the only school I have less patience with is Oklahoma. They aren't as cultured as Texas, no better than the mean of the SEC in education, and in many ways are just as pretentious as Austin but with much less reason to be. But both would be treated far better, and find nicer fan bases in the SEC than they will find elsewhere. And having lived for 7 years in the Big 10 country, and having lived on the West coast, and having traveled the Carolina's and I 95 corridor extensively I think I have a pretty good feel for this. BTW, we have family in Madison. They seldom think of the South except when the pecan harvest comes in. They live in a world where the Eastern boundary of the U.S. is NYC the Southern Boundary is Chicago, St. Louis is an excursion into wild country and the Dakota's are the Western boundary. So Texas might as well be next to Argentina.

But I don't think that's a form of existence the Longhorns would be comfortable subjecting themselves too. UT feels it has as much if not more leverage than Notre Dame, a will try and a deal similar to the Irish. Even if the ACC wouldn't give them one, I'm sure the B12 would readily capitulate. The 40 Acres only care about familial perspective as it relates to fan satisfaction and football schedules.

I agree if they can get a special deal in the ACC that it would appeal to them and likely assuage any qualms they may have over having the so called wine and cheese crowd tolerate them. It would probably make all involved happier if they took it. The SEC could still expand West without them. OU and Kansas, OU and WVU, even WVU and Kansas. Even if we still took 4 it would work, but would not be as profitable. We could take that second Texas school, OU, WVU, and Kansas. or if we had to OSU, OU, WVU, and Kansas.

Even with Oklahoma, the SEC needs another Texas school (it won't be the Longhorns).