(02-05-2015 10:43 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(02-05-2015 07:42 AM)JRsec Wrote:  If the core of the ACC is against accepting the top programs of the Big 12 for fear of losing control of their conference, and since football drives the economic bus for the conferences then perhaps ESPN should consider doing the following:

SEC:
North: Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia
East: Alabama, Auburn, Florida Georgia, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt
West: Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M

If the ACC gets the ACCN as some in ACC land believe is coming around 2017, I don't see the core ACC programs wandering off. I could see an annoyed Virginia wondering off the the B1G and then VT heading to the SEC to keep up with their in-state rival's media rights income. I still think, realistically, the only teams the SEC would expand to 15 for would be Virginia Tech or Oklahoma. If the SEC grabbed two from the ACC, first shot would be VT/NC State. If NCSU can't escape, FSU would get mulled over and then B12 options looked at.

I don't disagree with your picks for 15, but the issue we were surmising is a bit broader than that. If the ACC gets a network then they are going to have to have better football content. Right now according to some of our ACC posters, one in particular, the core schools of Duke, U.N.C., and Virginia are against additions of football powers from the Big 12 that would help to insure that content. So the question then becomes how could a network (ESPN) interested in maximizing the values of its product work around such an obstacle?

It's top product lacks basketball content. It's second, and exclusive product lacks football content, but if provided with it could command a bigger market with that content. It's top product commands its market and then some, but would earn even more with a larger market. While I'm not saying it is likely, I am saying that by placing the core of the Old ACC in the SEC both objectives would be astoundingly accomplished. The core of Virginia, Duke, and U.N.C. would not upset the traditional powers of the SEC and Kentucky would probably welcome the elite company, especially since they are so close geographically. Throw in Missouri and Florida and you have a new basketball cadre within the SEC and good winter content for the network. The elite basketball first status of the core is maintained in a conference that doesn't care if that is their emphasis, in fact welcomes it. The new ACC has enough football power to become a permanent rival for the SEC with season finales that would be annual must see events for the nation: Texas vs A&M, Oklahoma vs OSU, F.S.U. vs Florida, U.N.C. vs N.C. State, UVa vs Virginia Tech, Kansas vs Missouri, Clemson vs U.S.C., Kentucky vs Louisville, etc. all become part of a fantastic ratings weekend throughout the Southeast and Southwest and Midwest. Old mid season rivalries like Auburn vs Georgia Tech, Florida vs Miami, Kansas vs Kansas State then provide the spine of a mid season slate that peaks interest just when some fan bases are starting to slide.

Now you have the hype of opening season bolstered by mid season rivalries, and a larger slate of season ending, season making, or season redeeming games at the end. The SEC and ACC both expand their markets dramatically without losing any of their existing footprints, and ESPN locks down the Horns and Irish in the process.

An ACC with former big East basketball powers and football schools like OU, UT, F.S.U., Clemson, Virginia Tech, Miami, and Georgia Tech becomes the best possible foil for the expanded SEC.

At 18 schools each, or even 20, the internal championships become extra dramatic money makers for the conferences, and the two champs form half of the final four.

Then in the Spring between the two ESPN will dominate a growing fan interest in college baseball as well.

I'm just saying from a business perspective it's a winner.

But if expansion continues piecemeal then yes Oklahoma and Virginia Tech would be nice ways to expand. N.C. State would hold allure as a market, and F.S.U. as content.

It's been a while and realignment drags on out in expectation if not in fact. Whatever happens next will likely be part of the final phase of it all. I think there is little doubt that the Big 10 would like to have Kansas. If the ACC holds then the SEC needs to do what it takes to land the most valuable properties in the Big 12 even if that means making some compromises. So here are two strategies that could meet with favor perhaps from the Big 12 side of things.

18: The SEC takes Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. All four are solid programs and that locks down Texas and Oklahoma completely and leaves the Big 10 in Kansas.

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

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

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee

This three division conference gives everyone who they want to play locally, allows for 1 permanent crossover rival (if wanted) and allows for 4 schools a year to be rotated so that every three years everyone has played everyone else. What's more is that it is such a content conference that over a period of a few years we would be dwarfing everyone but the Big 10 in payout. Enough so that by waiting we could add a fourth division of 6 schools from the ACC. Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, N.C. State, Virginia Tech.

Now we have the Southwest Division, the Southeast Division, the Atlantic Coast Division, and the Gulf Coast Division each with its own network channel but all 4 bundled for a set price. Each Divisional channel would broadcast two games a week. ABC would get a prime time night game each week. ESPN & ESPN 2 would each get an early and late afternoon early night time slot, and CBS would get their traditional 2:30 CT slot. That means that all 12 games would be broadcast every week. The leverage would be tremendous, the footprint would now be consolidated instead of shared, and nobody could touch it. We'd keep every penny of every game until the national championship round.

Baseball would be 5 divisional games and a rotating division to play each year for 11 series and since all of the games for each division would be the same it would be fair.

Basketball would be a double round robin inside your division and 3 schools from each division rotating every year so that in two years you've played everyone.

All non revenue sports would be played in a conference region (consisting of the two closest division) with the top qualifiers going to a conference tournament.

Now that gives Texas its buddies to play, it without question is the preeminent sports conference in the nation and the content value would be through the roof. We move to conference semi finals and finals and our champ gets an auto bid to the National Championship round.

************************************************************************
It's the 25th of July 2015. As of right now the SEC should only take Oklahoma. Then if Texas wants in fine. If not we have three spots left for North Carolina, Duke and Virginia. We stop at 20.

(07-25-2015 06:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ************************************************************************
It's the 25th of July 2015. As of right now the SEC should only take Oklahoma. Then if Texas wants in fine. If not we have three spots left for North Carolina, Duke and Virginia. We stop at 20.

That's only 18 though if we take 4. Or do you mean we should leave a couple of spots open in case solid programs come calling?

Personally, I would rather go to 16 or to 20. I have a feeling that 18 is going to be a very awkward number to work with in the long haul. I was in favor of going to 16 last time rather than 14 for that very reason.

(07-25-2015 09:08 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(07-25-2015 06:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ************************************************************************
It's the 25th of July 2015. As of right now the SEC should only take Oklahoma. Then if Texas wants in fine. If not we have three spots left for North Carolina, Duke and Virginia. We stop at 20.

That's only 18 though if we take 4. Or do you mean we should leave a couple of spots open in case solid programs come calling?

Personally, I would rather go to 16 or to 20. I have a feeling that 18 is going to be a very awkward number to work with in the long haul. I was in favor of going to 16 last time rather than 14 for that very reason.

You SEC people should stop yourselves from becoming as insufferably grandiose as the midwestern Big Ten trash.

The Big 12 obviously cannot be truly stable. It lost its 3rd, 4th, and 5th largest football fan bases. It lost its 2nd largest state. A&M in the SEC means that the Big 12 never again can control its largest state.

The SEC is going to be ready to scoop up OU the second OU is ready to leave. # 16 could be almost anybody and work the SEC. If it were my decision, I'd take Texas Tech, Baylor, or TCU with OU to double the SEC exposure in TX.

(08-02-2015 11:45 AM)WoadBlue Wrote:  

(07-25-2015 09:08 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(07-25-2015 06:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ************************************************************************
It's the 25th of July 2015. As of right now the SEC should only take Oklahoma. Then if Texas wants in fine. If not we have three spots left for North Carolina, Duke and Virginia. We stop at 20.

That's only 18 though if we take 4. Or do you mean we should leave a couple of spots open in case solid programs come calling?

Personally, I would rather go to 16 or to 20. I have a feeling that 18 is going to be a very awkward number to work with in the long haul. I was in favor of going to 16 last time rather than 14 for that very reason.

You SEC people should stop yourselves from becoming as insufferably grandiose as the midwestern Big Ten trash.

The Big 12 obviously cannot be truly stable. It lost its 3rd, 4th, and 5th largest football fan bases. It lost its 2nd largest state. A&M in the SEC means that the Big 12 never again can control its largest state.

The SEC is going to be ready to scoop up OU the second OU is ready to leave. # 16 could be almost anybody and work the SEC. If it were my decision, I'd take Texas Tech, Baylor, or TCU with OU to double the SEC exposure in TX.

I don't believe that ESPN or the SEC have any true interest in raiding the ACC. The N.C. State & Virginia Tech rumors were centered around a move that ESPN wanted to make in 2010 with the ACC. Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and an unnamed school at that time were to move to the ACC (unnamed school was Notre Dame). The ACC would move to 16 (they already knew of Maryland's plans) and the SEC would give up long term objectives to the West (Texas and Oklahoma) and would gain markets that would increase ESPN & the SEC's value in our already planned network. When we invited Florida State they were independents.

Oklahoma would be our prime objective if we were to move to 16. With Oklahoma you can cross T.C.U. off the list as the Sooners deliver DFW as well as the Frogs do. Texas Tech is too far away. Maybe Baylor if not Texas, or Kansas (doesn't really fit), or West Virginia (but I doubt it).

But don't bother to use the term grandiose here. Nobody has the reputation for self delusion like the old core schools of the ACC. You're currently fifth in footprint saturation, meaning you hardly dominate any of your states other than Virginia and North Carolina. You are second in Florida, Kentucky, Georgia, and South Carolina. You are not the sports leader in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, or New York professional sports and other college programs squeeze you out depending upon the state. And if U.N.C. screws up landing Texas you'll languish in 4th or 5th place for the rest of your existence.

(08-02-2015 12:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-02-2015 11:45 AM)WoadBlue Wrote:  

(07-25-2015 09:08 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(07-25-2015 06:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ************************************************************************
It's the 25th of July 2015. As of right now the SEC should only take Oklahoma. Then if Texas wants in fine. If not we have three spots left for North Carolina, Duke and Virginia. We stop at 20.

That's only 18 though if we take 4. Or do you mean we should leave a couple of spots open in case solid programs come calling?

Personally, I would rather go to 16 or to 20. I have a feeling that 18 is going to be a very awkward number to work with in the long haul. I was in favor of going to 16 last time rather than 14 for that very reason.

You SEC people should stop yourselves from becoming as insufferably grandiose as the midwestern Big Ten trash.

The Big 12 obviously cannot be truly stable. It lost its 3rd, 4th, and 5th largest football fan bases. It lost its 2nd largest state. A&M in the SEC means that the Big 12 never again can control its largest state.

The SEC is going to be ready to scoop up OU the second OU is ready to leave. # 16 could be almost anybody and work the SEC. If it were my decision, I'd take Texas Tech, Baylor, or TCU with OU to double the SEC exposure in TX.

I don't believe that ESPN or the SEC have any true interest in raiding the ACC. The N.C. State & Virginia Tech rumors were centered around a move that ESPN wanted to make in 2010 with the ACC. Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and an unnamed school at that time were to move to the ACC (unnamed school was Notre Dame). The ACC would move to 16 (they already knew of Maryland's plans) and the SEC would give up long term objectives to the West (Texas and Oklahoma) and would gain markets that would increase ESPN & the SEC's value in our already planned network. When we invited Florida State they were independents.

Oklahoma would be our prime objective if we were to move to 16. With Oklahoma you can cross T.C.U. off the list as the Sooners deliver DFW as well as the Frogs do. Texas Tech is too far away. Maybe Baylor if not Texas, or Kansas (doesn't really fit), or West Virginia (but I doubt it).

But don't bother to use the term grandiose here. Nobody has the reputation for self delusion like the old core schools of the ACC. You're currently fifth in footprint saturation, meaning you hardly dominate any of your states other than Virginia and North Carolina. You are second in Florida, Kentucky, Georgia, and South Carolina. You are not the sports leader in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, or New York professional sports and other college programs squeeze you out depending upon the state. And if U.N.C. screws up landing Texas you'll languish in 4th or 5th place for the rest of your existence.

JR, you are dead wrong about South Carolina and we will be #1 in Kentucky within 5 years if not sooner.

(08-02-2015 02:27 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-02-2015 12:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-02-2015 11:45 AM)WoadBlue Wrote:  

(07-25-2015 09:08 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(07-25-2015 06:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  ************************************************************************
It's the 25th of July 2015. As of right now the SEC should only take Oklahoma. Then if Texas wants in fine. If not we have three spots left for North Carolina, Duke and Virginia. We stop at 20.

That's only 18 though if we take 4. Or do you mean we should leave a couple of spots open in case solid programs come calling?

Personally, I would rather go to 16 or to 20. I have a feeling that 18 is going to be a very awkward number to work with in the long haul. I was in favor of going to 16 last time rather than 14 for that very reason.

You SEC people should stop yourselves from becoming as insufferably grandiose as the midwestern Big Ten trash.

The Big 12 obviously cannot be truly stable. It lost its 3rd, 4th, and 5th largest football fan bases. It lost its 2nd largest state. A&M in the SEC means that the Big 12 never again can control its largest state.

The SEC is going to be ready to scoop up OU the second OU is ready to leave. # 16 could be almost anybody and work the SEC. If it were my decision, I'd take Texas Tech, Baylor, or TCU with OU to double the SEC exposure in TX.

I don't believe that ESPN or the SEC have any true interest in raiding the ACC. The N.C. State & Virginia Tech rumors were centered around a move that ESPN wanted to make in 2010 with the ACC. Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and an unnamed school at that time were to move to the ACC (unnamed school was Notre Dame). The ACC would move to 16 (they already knew of Maryland's plans) and the SEC would give up long term objectives to the West (Texas and Oklahoma) and would gain markets that would increase ESPN & the SEC's value in our already planned network. When we invited Florida State they were independents.

Oklahoma would be our prime objective if we were to move to 16. With Oklahoma you can cross T.C.U. off the list as the Sooners deliver DFW as well as the Frogs do. Texas Tech is too far away. Maybe Baylor if not Texas, or Kansas (doesn't really fit), or West Virginia (but I doubt it).

But don't bother to use the term grandiose here. Nobody has the reputation for self delusion like the old core schools of the ACC. You're currently fifth in footprint saturation, meaning you hardly dominate any of your states other than Virginia and North Carolina. You are second in Florida, Kentucky, Georgia, and South Carolina. You are not the sports leader in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, or New York professional sports and other college programs squeeze you out depending upon the state. And if U.N.C. screws up landing Texas you'll languish in 4th or 5th place for the rest of your existence.

JR, you are dead wrong about South Carolina and we will be #1 in Kentucky within 5 years if not sooner.

Back it up with data then because there isn't any that supports your position. Louisville is strong but will never pass UK. Only adding major football brands to the ACC will preserve Louisville's upward trajectory.

(08-02-2015 03:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-02-2015 02:27 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-02-2015 12:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-02-2015 11:45 AM)WoadBlue Wrote:  

(07-25-2015 09:08 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  That's only 18 though if we take 4. Or do you mean we should leave a couple of spots open in case solid programs come calling?

Personally, I would rather go to 16 or to 20. I have a feeling that 18 is going to be a very awkward number to work with in the long haul. I was in favor of going to 16 last time rather than 14 for that very reason.

You SEC people should stop yourselves from becoming as insufferably grandiose as the midwestern Big Ten trash.

The Big 12 obviously cannot be truly stable. It lost its 3rd, 4th, and 5th largest football fan bases. It lost its 2nd largest state. A&M in the SEC means that the Big 12 never again can control its largest state.

The SEC is going to be ready to scoop up OU the second OU is ready to leave. # 16 could be almost anybody and work the SEC. If it were my decision, I'd take Texas Tech, Baylor, or TCU with OU to double the SEC exposure in TX.

I don't believe that ESPN or the SEC have any true interest in raiding the ACC. The N.C. State & Virginia Tech rumors were centered around a move that ESPN wanted to make in 2010 with the ACC. Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and an unnamed school at that time were to move to the ACC (unnamed school was Notre Dame). The ACC would move to 16 (they already knew of Maryland's plans) and the SEC would give up long term objectives to the West (Texas and Oklahoma) and would gain markets that would increase ESPN & the SEC's value in our already planned network. When we invited Florida State they were independents.

Oklahoma would be our prime objective if we were to move to 16. With Oklahoma you can cross T.C.U. off the list as the Sooners deliver DFW as well as the Frogs do. Texas Tech is too far away. Maybe Baylor if not Texas, or Kansas (doesn't really fit), or West Virginia (but I doubt it).

But don't bother to use the term grandiose here. Nobody has the reputation for self delusion like the old core schools of the ACC. You're currently fifth in footprint saturation, meaning you hardly dominate any of your states other than Virginia and North Carolina. You are second in Florida, Kentucky, Georgia, and South Carolina. You are not the sports leader in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, or New York professional sports and other college programs squeeze you out depending upon the state. And if U.N.C. screws up landing Texas you'll languish in 4th or 5th place for the rest of your existence.

JR, you are dead wrong about South Carolina and we will be #1 in Kentucky within 5 years if not sooner.

Back it up with data then because there isn't any that supports your position. Louisville is strong but will never pass UK. Only adding major football brands to the ACC will preserve Louisville's upward trajectory.

Well, if you are talking sports leader as in post season play, while I can't speak for anyone else, UofL defeats uk if you look at Football(major/minor bowls), men's basketball(final fours, NC), baseball(Omaha), women's basketball(final fours and NC game appearances), men's soccer(elite 8, finals) over the past 6 years.
We at least have an upward trajectory.

(08-02-2015 10:01 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-02-2015 03:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-02-2015 02:27 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-02-2015 12:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-02-2015 11:45 AM)WoadBlue Wrote:  You SEC people should stop yourselves from becoming as insufferably grandiose as the midwestern Big Ten trash.

The Big 12 obviously cannot be truly stable. It lost its 3rd, 4th, and 5th largest football fan bases. It lost its 2nd largest state. A&M in the SEC means that the Big 12 never again can control its largest state.

The SEC is going to be ready to scoop up OU the second OU is ready to leave. # 16 could be almost anybody and work the SEC. If it were my decision, I'd take Texas Tech, Baylor, or TCU with OU to double the SEC exposure in TX.

I don't believe that ESPN or the SEC have any true interest in raiding the ACC. The N.C. State & Virginia Tech rumors were centered around a move that ESPN wanted to make in 2010 with the ACC. Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and an unnamed school at that time were to move to the ACC (unnamed school was Notre Dame). The ACC would move to 16 (they already knew of Maryland's plans) and the SEC would give up long term objectives to the West (Texas and Oklahoma) and would gain markets that would increase ESPN & the SEC's value in our already planned network. When we invited Florida State they were independents.

Oklahoma would be our prime objective if we were to move to 16. With Oklahoma you can cross T.C.U. off the list as the Sooners deliver DFW as well as the Frogs do. Texas Tech is too far away. Maybe Baylor if not Texas, or Kansas (doesn't really fit), or West Virginia (but I doubt it).

But don't bother to use the term grandiose here. Nobody has the reputation for self delusion like the old core schools of the ACC. You're currently fifth in footprint saturation, meaning you hardly dominate any of your states other than Virginia and North Carolina. You are second in Florida, Kentucky, Georgia, and South Carolina. You are not the sports leader in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, or New York professional sports and other college programs squeeze you out depending upon the state. And if U.N.C. screws up landing Texas you'll languish in 4th or 5th place for the rest of your existence.

JR, you are dead wrong about South Carolina and we will be #1 in Kentucky within 5 years if not sooner.

Back it up with data then because there isn't any that supports your position. Louisville is strong but will never pass UK. Only adding major football brands to the ACC will preserve Louisville's upward trajectory.

Well, if you are talking sports leader as in post season play, while I can't speak for anyone else, UofL defeats uk if you look at Football(major/minor bowls), men's basketball(final fours, NC), baseball(Omaha), women's basketball(final fours and NC game appearances), men's soccer(elite 8, finals) over the past 6 years.
We at least have an upward trajectory.

Until the city of Louisville is looked upon more favorably throughout the rest of the state I'm not sure if U of L fans will ever outnumber UK fans. That said, U of L has used its football success to grow its fan base throughout the state.

(08-03-2015 05:45 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(08-02-2015 10:01 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-02-2015 03:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-02-2015 02:27 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-02-2015 12:13 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I don't believe that ESPN or the SEC have any true interest in raiding the ACC. The N.C. State & Virginia Tech rumors were centered around a move that ESPN wanted to make in 2010 with the ACC. Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and an unnamed school at that time were to move to the ACC (unnamed school was Notre Dame). The ACC would move to 16 (they already knew of Maryland's plans) and the SEC would give up long term objectives to the West (Texas and Oklahoma) and would gain markets that would increase ESPN & the SEC's value in our already planned network. When we invited Florida State they were independents.

Oklahoma would be our prime objective if we were to move to 16. With Oklahoma you can cross T.C.U. off the list as the Sooners deliver DFW as well as the Frogs do. Texas Tech is too far away. Maybe Baylor if not Texas, or Kansas (doesn't really fit), or West Virginia (but I doubt it).

But don't bother to use the term grandiose here. Nobody has the reputation for self delusion like the old core schools of the ACC. You're currently fifth in footprint saturation, meaning you hardly dominate any of your states other than Virginia and North Carolina. You are second in Florida, Kentucky, Georgia, and South Carolina. You are not the sports leader in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, or New York professional sports and other college programs squeeze you out depending upon the state. And if U.N.C. screws up landing Texas you'll languish in 4th or 5th place for the rest of your existence.

JR, you are dead wrong about South Carolina and we will be #1 in Kentucky within 5 years if not sooner.

Back it up with data then because there isn't any that supports your position. Louisville is strong but will never pass UK. Only adding major football brands to the ACC will preserve Louisville's upward trajectory.

Well, if you are talking sports leader as in post season play, while I can't speak for anyone else, UofL defeats uk if you look at Football(major/minor bowls), men's basketball(final fours, NC), baseball(Omaha), women's basketball(final fours and NC game appearances), men's soccer(elite 8, finals) over the past 6 years.
We at least have an upward trajectory.

Until the city of Louisville is looked upon more favorably throughout the rest of the state I'm not sure if U of L fans will ever outnumber UK fans. That said, U of L has used its football success to grow its fan base throughout the state.

I don't think anyone in their right mind can argue that UK has better athletic programs than UofL. With a fraction of the income, UofL has passed UK on the fields/courts.

From a viewership standpoint, UofL will most likely never be on par with UK. In the city UofL enjoys a slight majority. If you venture more than 20-30 miles outside of Jefferson County the number moves to 80ish percent UK. If you get out into the state you are hard pressed to find a handful of UofL fans in entire counties.

I grew up in Nelson County just 35 minutes from UofL. Of the 1500 kids in our high school, there were maybe 30 Louisville fans. You see more of them today but we are still greatly outnumbered. I find it highly unlikely that out fanbase ever pupils even with UK.

We will just have to settle for stomping them in the win loss column.

These thoughts are partly mine and partly those of one of our Big 12 posters.

What do you think would be the response of Texas if the SEC offered, in pursuit of an academic alliance with the ACC, Kansas, Iowa State, Oklahoma and Texas membership? Do you think the Longhorns might be willing to come to the SEC if their mission was to spearhead a Southern Academic Consortium including the AAU schools of the SEC, ACC, and Southern privates not affiliated with the two conferences: Tulane, Tulsa, Rice, & Emory.

In light of Sankey's recent comments pertaining to the SEC's academic pursuits how far do you think such an alliance could prove fruitful in joint research projects throughout the Midwest and Southeast?

The resulting conference would be quite interesting:

Arkansas, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas

Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Miss State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee

At this point does Academic pursuits harm or help the Athletic pursuits of the SEC? I'd say given the basketball abilities of Iowa State and Kansas that it would be a whale of a win, win, even if the cultural fit wasn't quite perfect for the whole conference, it certainly would be for the new Western division.

(08-25-2015 04:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  These thoughts are partly mine and partly those of one of our Big 12 posters.

What do you think would be the response of Texas if the SEC offered, in pursuit of an academic alliance with the ACC, Kansas, Iowa State, Oklahoma and Texas membership? Do you think the Longhorns might be willing to come to the SEC if their mission was to spearhead a Southern Academic Consortium including the AAU schools of the SEC, ACC, and Southern privates not affiliated with the two conferences: Tulane, Tulsa, Rice, & Emory.

In light of Sankey's recent comments pertaining to the SEC's academic pursuits how far do you think such an alliance could prove fruitful in joint research projects throughout the Midwest and Southeast?

The resulting conference would be quite interesting:

Arkansas, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas

Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Miss State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee

At this point does Academic pursuits harm or help the Athletic pursuits of the SEC? I'd say given the basketball abilities of Iowa State and Kansas that it would be a whale of a win, win, even if the cultural fit wasn't quite perfect for the whole conference, it certainly would be for the new Western division.

Sounds like a fine idea to me.

I have no idea how UT would respond though.

(08-25-2015 04:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  These thoughts are partly mine and partly those of one of our Big 12 posters.

What do you think would be the response of Texas if the SEC offered, in pursuit of an academic alliance with the ACC, Kansas, Iowa State, Oklahoma and Texas membership? Do you think the Longhorns might be willing to come to the SEC if their mission was to spearhead a Southern Academic Consortium including the AAU schools of the SEC, ACC, and Southern privates not affiliated with the two conferences: Tulane, Tulsa, Rice, & Emory.

In light of Sankey's recent comments pertaining to the SEC's academic pursuits how far do you think such an alliance could prove fruitful in joint research projects throughout the Midwest and Southeast?

The resulting conference would be quite interesting:

Arkansas, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas

Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Miss State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee

At this point does Academic pursuits harm or help the Athletic pursuits of the SEC? I'd say given the basketball abilities of Iowa State and Kansas that it would be a whale of a win, win, even if the cultural fit wasn't quite perfect for the whole conference, it certainly would be for the new Western division.

If we did do this then I would go ahead and add a couple more strong academic schools and go to 20. The numbers on scheduling would work much better.

If we're partnering with the ACC for the long haul then there's no reason to anticipate a NC or VA school being added to our roster at any point.

(08-25-2015 11:34 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 04:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  These thoughts are partly mine and partly those of one of our Big 12 posters.

What do you think would be the response of Texas if the SEC offered, in pursuit of an academic alliance with the ACC, Kansas, Iowa State, Oklahoma and Texas membership? Do you think the Longhorns might be willing to come to the SEC if their mission was to spearhead a Southern Academic Consortium including the AAU schools of the SEC, ACC, and Southern privates not affiliated with the two conferences: Tulane, Tulsa, Rice, & Emory.

In light of Sankey's recent comments pertaining to the SEC's academic pursuits how far do you think such an alliance could prove fruitful in joint research projects throughout the Midwest and Southeast?

The resulting conference would be quite interesting:

Arkansas, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas

Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Miss State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee

At this point does Academic pursuits harm or help the Athletic pursuits of the SEC? I'd say given the basketball abilities of Iowa State and Kansas that it would be a whale of a win, win, even if the cultural fit wasn't quite perfect for the whole conference, it certainly would be for the new Western division.

If we did do this then I would go ahead and add a couple more strong academic schools and go to 20. The numbers on scheduling would work much better.

If we're partnering with the ACC for the long haul then there's no reason to anticipate a NC or VA school being added to our roster at any point.

How about just adding an Atlantic division of 6 schools: Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Virginia and Syracuse or Notre Dame.


Now while I don't really favor that this is what I could favor instead:

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

Now you have 9 AAU programs, all of the South's flagship programs, and 6 basketball brands. And all with a more manageable 20 schools.

(08-30-2015 09:11 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 11:34 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(08-25-2015 04:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  These thoughts are partly mine and partly those of one of our Big 12 posters.

What do you think would be the response of Texas if the SEC offered, in pursuit of an academic alliance with the ACC, Kansas, Iowa State, Oklahoma and Texas membership? Do you think the Longhorns might be willing to come to the SEC if their mission was to spearhead a Southern Academic Consortium including the AAU schools of the SEC, ACC, and Southern privates not affiliated with the two conferences: Tulane, Tulsa, Rice, & Emory.

In light of Sankey's recent comments pertaining to the SEC's academic pursuits how far do you think such an alliance could prove fruitful in joint research projects throughout the Midwest and Southeast?

The resulting conference would be quite interesting:

Arkansas, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas

Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Miss State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee

At this point does Academic pursuits harm or help the Athletic pursuits of the SEC? I'd say given the basketball abilities of Iowa State and Kansas that it would be a whale of a win, win, even if the cultural fit wasn't quite perfect for the whole conference, it certainly would be for the new Western division.

If we did do this then I would go ahead and add a couple more strong academic schools and go to 20. The numbers on scheduling would work much better.

If we're partnering with the ACC for the long haul then there's no reason to anticipate a NC or VA school being added to our roster at any point.

How about just adding an Atlantic division of 6 schools: Duke, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Virginia and Syracuse or Notre Dame.


Now while I don't really favor that this is what I could favor instead:

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

Now you have 9 AAU programs, all of the South's flagship programs, and 6 basketball brands. And all with a more manageable 20 schools.

I think you should drop Kentucky for Louisville.

16 teams is the end goal IMO, and #15 and #16 will maximize markets

The states of Virginia and North Carolina are the most desirable targets....BUT if the ACC stands firm. I don't think I'd anyone from the Big XII....

Honestly, I think Cincinnati and East Carolina would fit nicely into the SEC just as well as anyone

Oklahoma is attractive, but doesn't really add anything new....Oklahoma markets? hmmm

Does OU even want to be in the SEC? would Okie State be part of the picture?

Well on Landthieves they are mostly all on board the SEC train now. To be fair most just want out, but the SEC is the preferred destination now, when it used to be split fairly evenly between the SEC/PAC/B1G. Supposedly their big cigars/BoR are behind a SEC move if you believe their "insiders". Boren and the academic side, probably not as much.

Boren was a US senator and has a building named after him at OSU so he wants to take care of OSU if at all possible, which pisses off most OU fans, who want what is best for OU, regardless of what happens to OSU. He has shopped OU/OSU as a pair or with other partners to every other conference, but the ACC. Nobody else is excited to take on a 2nd school in OK, even to land OU, which is a prize.

I think Texas should go to the ACC. But they should go with Oklahoma and Kansas with N.D. all in. The SEC should get Virginia Tech and N.C. State. This reduces the North Carolina block and sets up a democratic association in the ACC. North Carolina refuses to give up their power hold and that is why things are not already a P4. IMO the PAC would likely take two Texas schools for the markets, find a way to work out differences with B.Y.U., and add a 4th from (Nevada, U.N.L.V., New Mexico, Boise State, or Oklahoma State.) They need the markets.

But I think in the end the ACC will take in Notre Dame and perhaps West Virginia. The SEC will take in Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. Texas will look again to the PAC and take Texas Tech and T.C.U. to give them the whole state of Texas. And I believe that the Big 10 will get Kansas and Iowa State / Connecticut. I think nobody will be happy ultimately.

The SEC will not love the double up in a small market although OU will add much for content to an already content rich conference.

The ACC will forever resent Notre Dame's ability to mobilize its revenue into success and will forever resent another academic laggard.

The Big 10 will celebrate Kansas while secretly resenting the lack of football additions and will resent taking ISU or Connecticut. Will it be a new state and a substandard non AAU school, or a duplicate state school that meets their requirements.

Texas will move to the PAC, possibly with even Baylor in tow, but more likely with Kansas State. They will forever resent leaving Aggie to get the football headlines while the Horns settle into a less stellar pigskin existence in a conference that would prefer other entertainment to college athletics.

While I agree with Jayhawk that Texas will prefer to wait out the ACC GOR and cherry pick a new conference, I think in the end, especially now that UT is diminishing in on field performance, that it will be Texas that moves. I don't think the economy will permit for the time it takes for the GOR to play out. Therefore regional needs with regards to non revenue sports will help to dictate movement.

JR, you are quickly becoming a one trick pony.
The fatal flaw in your line of reasoning is that if ESPN is looking at revenue (which you know that they are) is that movement only moves one way.
By moving Va. Tech and NC State to the SEC, the SEC only gets a small audience gain (but a network foothold, I admit) and the ACC gains strangers?
Now if the idea is to integrate for maximum broadcast impact which in turn means more money for everyone; NC State and Va. Tech to the SEC while Auburn and Vanderbilt move to the ACC. The ACC then picks up Texas and Notre Dame to get to 16 (or Texas and TCU/Baylor/Kansas if Notre Dame won't join as a full member). The SEC could then take Oklahoma and West Virginia (would make a nice pod with Kentucky, Va. Tech and Tennessee) or Baylor. I would make sure that Clemson, Auburn, Vanderbilt and Georgia Tech were in the same pod for the ACC.

In this situation everybody benefits because you would have 9 states (Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina,
Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky and Texas) with at least one ACC and 1 SEC member which means more money for the SEC, more money for the ACC and most importantly, more money for ESPN.

Just to finish out: the PAC could add Texas Tech, TCU, Oklahoma State, and Kansas State.
The B1G gets their two AAU schools in Kansas and Iowa State.