(01-09-2021 09:44 PM)ICThawk Wrote:  

(01-09-2021 08:18 PM)texoma Wrote:  I think RocketSooner described Texas best. They talk academics, but want power more..

The closer realignment gets the more I believe, that if OU leaves the Big12, Texas will go Indy in football and leave their other sports in the Big12 with a Notre Dame/ACC type arrangement.

ESPN might even help them out. I really am not informed on how the Networks function. Texas could keep the LHN and play six conference games and six other teams with a mix of National schools, other in state schools or one and done games. They would be in control.

I would imagine the remaining Big12 schools would look to add enough teams to get to 12 teams, among BYU, Colorado State, Air Force, Houston or Rice, SMU, Memphis and Cincy.

I generally agree with your post as to what Texas might "like" to do but am not sure how "practical" it would be for Texas to become an "independent". The main problem I see is that football schedules are done years in advance. What Texas could find much in the way of available "national" brands to play for at least several years after going independent would be a question. Notre Dame has been playing "national" schools for so long they have their schedule pretty well mapped out. Texas does have OCC games already scheduled but only one "national" type game each year (at least through 2027, and even then the "home" game with the "national team" occurs only every other year). "Buyouts" on games currently on the Texas schedule to make room for any "national" team, not to mention what Texas might have to pay to "buyout" the game of the team they want to play so they could schedule Texas instead might make it a financially losing proposition for the athletic department for quite a few years.

You make some valid points about scheduling.

However, we are talking about realignment 4-5 years from now. That should give Texas ample time for future scheduling.

They currently schedule one national team each year. Assume that they would play six Big12 teams, two national games plus Oklahoma, two P5 teams and one money game each year.

They would only have to add one national game and with all of the TV arranged neutral sight games each year, that should not be a problem. Especially games in Arlington, Houston and San Antonio. Most P5 teams would be thrilled to schedule Texas with their TV following and 100,000 seat stadium. Plus BYU is always available. If they have more than one money game scheduled that far out, which I doubt, could easily be moved. Any P5 games scheduled that far out would just be played.

So I do not see any need for buyouts.

If Texas goes to the BIG..it would be a terrible decision.. rather go independent than join the BIG west

THAT is Very True..!!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(01-09-2021 08:18 PM)texoma Wrote:  I think RocketSooner and JR both described Texas best. They like to define them selves as academics, but want power more..

The closer realignment gets, the more I believe, that if OU leaves the Big12, Texas will go Indy in football and leave their other sports in the Big12 with a Notre Dame/ACC type arrangement.

ESPN might even help them out. However, I am not informed on how the Networks function. Texas could keep the LHN and play six conference games and six other teams with a mix of National schools, other in state schools or one and done games. They would be in control.

I would imagine the remaining Big12 schools and Texas would look to add enough teams to get to 12 teams, among BYU, Colorado State, Air Force, Houston or Rice, SMU, Memphis and Cincy.

If Oklahoma bails first, which I think is the most likely scenario, then I could easily see Texas going for independence. It might not be the long term solution that would satisfy all their desires, but I would be a little surprised if they didn't kick the tires.

Leaving for any other conference presents its own set of issues that they likely don't want to deal with. They would better off in the SEC, but the thought of following in A&M's footsteps, especially if Oklahoma is the one that forced the move, seems beyond the pale.

They could preserve their business model and maintain a lot of other priorities by reorganizing the Big 12. The league will be happy to give them a partial deal.

-For the purpose of this exercise, I'm going to assume that Oklahoma and Kansas move to the SEC.

-Texas can go independent and I think they would take a 6 game deal with the caveat that 3 of the games must be against fellow TX schools.

-BYU, Houston, and SMU could get the call to backfill. I would consider it a possibility that schools like Cincinnati, Memphis, UCF, or USF could be called upon to expand to 12. My gut feeling is that the I-5 Twins would get the call as they have more upside.

East: UCF, USF, West Virginia, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State
West: BYU, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, SMU, Houston

The league plays 8 conference games and divides into reasonable divisions for the purpose of a CCG. They play 8 instead of 9 in part to make room for the occasional game against Texas.

For Texas' part, if they play half their schedule against the Big 12 including 3 TX schools among those 6 then all they have to do is fill 6 slots. Oklahoma would be one of those games as that's an extremely valuable rivalry for them.

My bet is that Notre Dame would be on the schedule more years than not. They could be very flexible in scheduling each other during times when other opponents are hard to find.

Army is a solid option that would be available...bringing some name recognition while not necessarily causing a lot of competitive issues.

That's 3 more in most years. They could get New Mexico State whenever they want...not that far away. Likely that UT would want to play a couple of relatives cupcakes anyway.

Arkansas would make room for them on a regular basis.

I think they could get a couple of Big Ten or PAC 12 schools to juggle around on a regular basis.

They might go a couple of years without a top notch schedule, but it shouldn't take them long. A lot of teams would rather play Texas if the opportunity came knocking.

^That's a pretty good Big 12 lineup and may be enough to keep their place in the P5. That's probably their reward for helping to keep out any potential threat of infiltration from the G group.

(01-11-2021 12:51 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-09-2021 08:18 PM)texoma Wrote:  I think RocketSooner and JR both described Texas best. They like to define them selves as academics, but want power more..

The closer realignment gets, the more I believe, that if OU leaves the Big12, Texas will go Indy in football and leave their other sports in the Big12 with a Notre Dame/ACC type arrangement.

ESPN might even help them out. However, I am not informed on how the Networks function. Texas could keep the LHN and play six conference games and six other teams with a mix of National schools, other in state schools or one and done games. They would be in control.

I would imagine the remaining Big12 schools and Texas would look to add enough teams to get to 12 teams, among BYU, Colorado State, Air Force, Houston or Rice, SMU, Memphis and Cincy.

If Oklahoma bails first, which I think is the most likely scenario, then I could easily see Texas going for independence. It might not be the long term solution that would satisfy all their desires, but I would be a little surprised if they didn't kick the tires.

Leaving for any other conference presents its own set of issues that they likely don't want to deal with. They would better off in the SEC, but the thought of following in A&M's footsteps, especially if Oklahoma is the one that forced the move, seems beyond the pale.

They could preserve their business model and maintain a lot of other priorities by reorganizing the Big 12. The league will be happy to give them a partial deal.

-For the purpose of this exercise, I'm going to assume that Oklahoma and Kansas move to the SEC.

-Texas can go independent and I think they would take a 6 game deal with the caveat that 3 of the games must be against fellow TX schools.

-BYU, Houston, and SMU could get the call to backfill. I would consider it a possibility that schools like Cincinnati, Memphis, UCF, or USF could be called upon to expand to 12. My gut feeling is that the I-5 Twins would get the call as they have more upside.

East: UCF, USF, West Virginia, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State
West: BYU, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, SMU, Houston

The league plays 8 conference games and divides into reasonable divisions for the purpose of a CCG. They play 8 instead of 9 in part to make room for the occasional game against Texas.

For Texas' part, if they play half their schedule against the Big 12 including 3 TX schools among those 6 then all they have to do is fill 6 slots. Oklahoma would be one of those games as that's an extremely valuable rivalry for them.

My bet is that Notre Dame would be on the schedule more years than not. They could be very flexible in scheduling each other during times when other opponents are hard to find.

Army is a solid option that would be available...bringing some name recognition while not necessarily causing a lot of competitive issues.

That's 3 more in most years. They could get New Mexico State whenever they want...not that far away. Likely that UT would want to play a couple of relatives cupcakes anyway.

Arkansas would make room for them on a regular basis.

I think they could get a couple of Big Ten or PAC 12 schools to juggle around on a regular basis.

They might go a couple of years without a top notch schedule, but it shouldn't take them long. A lot of teams would rather play Texas if the opportunity came knocking.

One of the primary Notre Dame had to attach themselves to a conference was because it was so hard to schedule especially late in the season when other teams entered conference play.
Scheduling in September as a breeze, but November was tough.
Few schools that are desirable match-ups want to schedule a tough opponent in the middle of their conference schedule. Texas would have the same problem.

I said I rather go independent that joining the BIG West, which is true, but I see no way UT goes independent in Football. I can see them sticking in the Big12 along with ou if they get some flagship schools to join (ASU, UT, CO....maybe NE?) the conference.

Or they make the easy decision of playing in the SEC west. All this power talk that some posters bring into play is a running myth. Texas will always do what is best for Texas but they weren't the bullies that so many portray them too. NE got upset that they moved the CCG game to JerryWorld permanently.. but the money was much bigger there than at arrowhead or the Transdome (St Louis). Hell I could see the SEC open an office in Frisco as well, and start hosting media days there every few years.

(01-11-2021 10:11 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  I said I rather go independent that joining the BIG West, which is true, but I see no way UT goes independent in Football. I can see them sticking in the Big12 along with ou if they get some flagship schools to join (ASU, UT, CO....maybe NE?) the conference.

Or they make the easy decision of playing in the SEC west. All this power talk that some posters bring into play is a running myth. Texas will always do what is best for Texas but they weren't the bullies that so many portray them too. NE got upset that they moved the CCG game to JerryWorld permanently.. but the money was much bigger there than at arrowhead or the Transdome (St Louis). Hell I could see the SEC open an office in Frisco as well, and start hosting media days there every few years.

What people consistently refuse to engage is the solid position the SEC is in with regard to Texas and Oklahoma. The SEC doesn't want to force Alabama to play Texas or Oklahoma annually. The SEC wants to essentially become two solid 8 team conferences operating as divisions within one conference.

The lure for Texas to the SEC is not to be subjugated to Alabama and Florida but separated from them while combining revenue driving forces. Texas and Oklahoma would keep their own show and would likely contend with only two other schools for supremacy on an annual basis. They would face old foes Missouri and Arkansas, and have to contend with the 2 Mississippi schools, but that's no worse than dealing with Oklahoma State and T.C.U.. It's L.S.U. and Texas A&M that would rival them but that's where the money is over playing a Kansas State and Iowa State. Those are national interest games. They wouldn't be playing an Alabama or Auburn or Georgia or Florida on any regular basis unless it was in the CCG.

Critics love to talk about how Texas would be subjugated to Alabama. What they never present accurately are the divisions that would actually arise:

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

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

In those divisions there are at least 4 schools each year that would likely be able to compete for the division title and a shot in the CCG. Texas is no worse off in chances than they were in the old Big 12 and only slightly more difficult than the old SWC.

Instead of playing Alabama in the Cotton Bowl they would play them or another Eastern school in the CCG for a shot at the CFP, and who knows, but most years perhaps the two CCG finalists wind up in an 8 team CFP.

Either way the so called loss of control, and murderer's row talk is nothing but message board red herrings.

Without Texas or Oklahoma the SEC will be making 64.2 million by 2024 per school in media revenue. With them they are making ~ 70 million per school by 2024. Now even if you are Texas, that's a lot of money. It's a helluva lot more than the 54 million they are making right now with the LHN included.

(01-11-2021 11:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 10:11 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  I said I rather go independent that joining the BIG West, which is true, but I see no way UT goes independent in Football. I can see them sticking in the Big12 along with ou if they get some flagship schools to join (ASU, UT, CO....maybe NE?) the conference.

Or they make the easy decision of playing in the SEC west. All this power talk that some posters bring into play is a running myth. Texas will always do what is best for Texas but they weren't the bullies that so many portray them too. NE got upset that they moved the CCG game to JerryWorld permanently.. but the money was much bigger there than at arrowhead or the Transdome (St Louis). Hell I could see the SEC open an office in Frisco as well, and start hosting media days there every few years.

What people consistently refuse to engage is the solid position the SEC is in with regard to Texas and Oklahoma. The SEC doesn't want to force Alabama to play Texas or Oklahoma annually. The SEC wants to essentially become two solid 8 team conferences operating as divisions within one conference.

The lure for Texas to the SEC is not to be subjugated to Alabama and Florida but separated from them while combining revenue driving forces. Texas and Oklahoma would keep their own show and would likely contend with only two other schools for supremacy on an annual basis. They would face old foes Missouri and Arkansas, and have to contend with the 2 Mississippi schools, but that's no worse than dealing with Oklahoma State and T.C.U.. It's L.S.U. and Texas A&M that would rival them but that's where the money is over playing a Kansas State and Iowa State. Those are national interest games. They wouldn't be playing an Alabama or Auburn or Georgia or Florida on any regular basis unless it was in the CCG.

Critics love to talk about how Texas would be subjugated to Alabama. What they never present accurately are the divisions that would actually arise:

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

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

In those divisions there are at least 4 schools each year that would likely be able to compete for the division title and a shot in the CCG. Texas is no worse off in chances than they were in the old Big 12 and only slightly more difficult than the old SWC.

Instead of playing Alabama in the Cotton Bowl they would play them or another Eastern school in the CCG for a shot at the CFP, and who knows, but most years perhaps the two CCG finalists wind up in an 8 team CFP.

Either way the so called loss of control, and murderer's row talk is nothing but message board red herrings.

Without Texas or Oklahoma the SEC will be making 64.2 million by 2024 per school in media revenue. With them they are making ~ 70 million per school by 2024. Now even if you are Texas, that's a lot of money. It's a helluva lot more than the 54 million they are making right now with the LHN included.

That 16-school lineup is very solid. The question then is where do the other conferences go?

The B1G could add Iowa St and Kansas but I’m not sure they really want either. It could make Nebraska happier if that’s at all a concern.

The PAC would have an okay group of 4 with Kansas St, Oklahoma St, TCU, and Texas Tech.

The ACC could reach 16 with Cincinnati and West Virginia.

Baylor could join BYU football in the AAC.

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

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

PAC
West: California, Oregon, Oregon St, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington, Washington St
East: Arizona, Arizona St, Colorado, Kansas St, Oklahoma St, TCU, Texas Tech, Utah

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

AAC
West: Baylor, BYU*, Houston, Navy*, SMU, Tulsa
East: Central Florida, East Carolina, Memphis, South Florida, Temple, Tulane
* Football-only

(01-11-2021 11:58 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 11:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 10:11 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  I said I rather go independent that joining the BIG West, which is true, but I see no way UT goes independent in Football. I can see them sticking in the Big12 along with ou if they get some flagship schools to join (ASU, UT, CO....maybe NE?) the conference.

Or they make the easy decision of playing in the SEC west. All this power talk that some posters bring into play is a running myth. Texas will always do what is best for Texas but they weren't the bullies that so many portray them too. NE got upset that they moved the CCG game to JerryWorld permanently.. but the money was much bigger there than at arrowhead or the Transdome (St Louis). Hell I could see the SEC open an office in Frisco as well, and start hosting media days there every few years.

What people consistently refuse to engage is the solid position the SEC is in with regard to Texas and Oklahoma. The SEC doesn't want to force Alabama to play Texas or Oklahoma annually. The SEC wants to essentially become two solid 8 team conferences operating as divisions within one conference.

The lure for Texas to the SEC is not to be subjugated to Alabama and Florida but separated from them while combining revenue driving forces. Texas and Oklahoma would keep their own show and would likely contend with only two other schools for supremacy on an annual basis. They would face old foes Missouri and Arkansas, and have to contend with the 2 Mississippi schools, but that's no worse than dealing with Oklahoma State and T.C.U.. It's L.S.U. and Texas A&M that would rival them but that's where the money is over playing a Kansas State and Iowa State. Those are national interest games. They wouldn't be playing an Alabama or Auburn or Georgia or Florida on any regular basis unless it was in the CCG.

Critics love to talk about how Texas would be subjugated to Alabama. What they never present accurately are the divisions that would actually arise:

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

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

In those divisions there are at least 4 schools each year that would likely be able to compete for the division title and a shot in the CCG. Texas is no worse off in chances than they were in the old Big 12 and only slightly more difficult than the old SWC.

Instead of playing Alabama in the Cotton Bowl they would play them or another Eastern school in the CCG for a shot at the CFP, and who knows, but most years perhaps the two CCG finalists wind up in an 8 team CFP.

Either way the so called loss of control, and murderer's row talk is nothing but message board red herrings.

Without Texas or Oklahoma the SEC will be making 64.2 million by 2024 per school in media revenue. With them they are making ~ 70 million per school by 2024. Now even if you are Texas, that's a lot of money. It's a helluva lot more than the 54 million they are making right now with the LHN included.

That 16-school lineup is very solid. The question then is where do the other conferences go?

The B1G could add Iowa St and Kansas but I’m not sure they really want either. It could make Nebraska happier if that’s at all a concern.

The PAC would have an okay group of 4 with Kansas St, Oklahoma St, TCU, and Texas Tech.

The ACC could reach 16 with Cincinnati and West Virginia.

Baylor could join BYU football in the AAC.

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

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

PAC
West: California, Oregon, Oregon St, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington, Washington St
East: Arizona, Arizona St, Colorado, Kansas St, Oklahoma St, TCU, Texas Tech, Utah

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

AAC
West: Baylor, BYU*, Houston, Navy*, SMU, Tulsa
East: Central Florida, East Carolina, Memphis, South Florida, Temple, Tulane
* Football-only

The disproportionate revenue leaves Notre Dame pressured. The Big 10 looks to Notre Dame (much easier to buy out) and either Colorado or Kansas.

They stop at 16. The rest are the ones who have coalesce.

Some will say what pressure is own Notre Dame? The same pressure that is on the ACC with the SEC and Big 10 revenues shooting up. Does N.D. really want to concede so much advantage to a Big 10 school competing with them for students and recruits? Right now they are fine, but they are thinning and sooner or later they'll have to do what is best for them long term rather than cling to the past until they reach irrelevance.

Should Texas and Oklahoma move to the SEC that's the #1 and #3 most valuable prizes out there. Notre Dame is #2. So pairing them with another solid basketball brand or market is what the Big 10 would likely do, and of course they would need to be AAU even though N.D. doesn't have to be.

I think if UT and ou went to the SEC at 15 and 16.. ESPN would make ND happy and do what will make them happy for them to continue it's ACC agreement.

JRSEC.. if UT and ou decided to join the SEC.. I would wager that you would then see 3 SEC teams in the CFP if it stays at 4. There will be more one loss teams just sitting outside the top schools in conference.. which brings me to this.. If Texas and ou came on board, would the SEC have it's own playoff? Take the top 4 schools regardless of Div.. have the highest ranking school play the lowest ranking school, then the winner faces the winner between #3 and #4.. How much money would that bring in just for the conference itself?

(01-11-2021 01:23 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  I think if UT and ou went to the SEC at 15 and 16.. ESPN would make ND happy and do what will make them happy for them to continue it's ACC agreement.

JRSEC.. if UT and ou decided to join the SEC.. I would wager that you would then see 3 SEC teams in the CFP if it stays at 4. There will be more one loss teams just sitting outside the top schools in conference.. which brings me to this.. If Texas and ou came on board, would the SEC have it's own playoff? Take the top 4 schools regardless of Div.. have the highest ranking school play the lowest ranking school, then the winner faces the winner between #3 and #4.. How much money would that bring in just for the conference itself?

ESPN would try to hang onto N.D. but would they pay them enough to make 65 million a year? Not sure.

If ESPN wanted to be aggressive with the Big 12 and expand the SEC to 18 or even 20 out of the Big 12 then maybe we see some kind of conference semis. But that's a long shot.

At 18 you would have 3 divisions of 6 with a wild card to make the conference semis. Those two games would be massive money makers. The CCG is a massive earner for the SEC and I would think the two semi games would come close to equaling what the finals are worth so there is impetus for such a move.

I always guessed that at 18 we are talking Texas Tech and Oklahoma State in addition to Texas and Oklahoma. At 20 add Kansas for basketball branding and who? Iowa State who is always solid and has loyal fans? West Virginia which is competitive in most major sports and has solid fan support? I doubt we go that far but it could be interesting.

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

It won't happen, but it would make for an interesting conference.

If the SEC were to go to 18 with the Texlahoma 4 then I think the next step is 20 or 24 when the ACC GOR ends.

(01-11-2021 01:59 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the SEC were to go to 18 with the Texlahoma 4 then I think the next step is 20 or 24 when the ACC GOR ends.

Right, however the reality of that would make the SEC less likely to move to 18. Do you really want to give up seats that easily now, when it may cost you solid opportunities for market expansion later?

Pro expansion with Texa-homa is that the SEC would dominate the old SWC market with those 4 schools plus Arkansas, A&M, & L.S.U. which is strong in Houston, like A&M. If it is about eyeballs then Texa-homa is worth more than an extra 2 slots for ACC schools.

The con side is that by giving up those two slots you might miss out of a deal that would land the top North Carolina schools. I'm not worried about F.S.U. and Clemson because if the ACC were getting raided those two are safer, wealthier, and their fan bases more secure in the SEC and neither has tag along baggage.

(01-11-2021 02:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 01:59 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the SEC were to go to 18 with the Texlahoma 4 then I think the next step is 20 or 24 when the ACC GOR ends.

Right, however the reality of that would make the SEC less likely to move to 18. Do you really want to give up seats that easily now, when it may cost you solid opportunities for market expansion later?

Pro expansion with Texa-homa is that the SEC would dominate the old SWC market with those 4 schools plus Arkansas, A&M, & L.S.U. which is strong in Houston, like A&M. If it is about eyeballs then Texa-homa is worth more than an extra 2 slots for ACC schools.

The con side is that by giving up those two slots you might miss out of a deal that would land the top North Carolina schools. I'm not worried about F.S.U. and Clemson because if the ACC were getting raided those two are safer, wealthier, and their fan bases more secure in the SEC and neither has tag along baggage.

Good points.

If you’re thinking from a strictly SEC standpoint though isn’t there some fear that if you don’t accommodate TTU and OK St in 2024 that you could send say Oklahoma to the Big Ten. I think Oklahoma is itching to make a move and if it’s clear that neither the Big Ten or SEC will take Oklahoma St I think they go to the Big Ten simply to make the academic folks happy.

I think going to 18 in 2024 puts the SEC in a good place to either strategically pick their top 2 ACC schools in 2037 or take 6 if there’s enough programs there that could help compete the SEC and ESPN’s stranglehold of the South.

By 2037 I seriously question what kind of state some of those ACC programs are going to be in. College football’s following may be so weak in NC and VA that it doesn’t even make sense to go after them.

I think it’s smarter to lock in value programs now rather than hold open spots for team’s whose future value may be demonstrably lower by the time they actually become available on the market.

(01-11-2021 02:28 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 02:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 01:59 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the SEC were to go to 18 with the Texlahoma 4 then I think the next step is 20 or 24 when the ACC GOR ends.

Right, however the reality of that would make the SEC less likely to move to 18. Do you really want to give up seats that easily now, when it may cost you solid opportunities for market expansion later?

Pro expansion with Texa-homa is that the SEC would dominate the old SWC market with those 4 schools plus Arkansas, A&M, & L.S.U. which is strong in Houston, like A&M. If it is about eyeballs then Texa-homa is worth more than an extra 2 slots for ACC schools.

The con side is that by giving up those two slots you might miss out of a deal that would land the top North Carolina schools. I'm not worried about F.S.U. and Clemson because if the ACC were getting raided those two are safer, wealthier, and their fan bases more secure in the SEC and neither has tag along baggage.

Good points.

If you’re thinking from a strictly SEC standpoint though isn’t there some fear that if you don’t accommodate TTU and OK St in 2024 that you could send say Oklahoma to the Big Ten. I think Oklahoma is itching to make a move and if it’s clear that neither the Big Ten or SEC will take Oklahoma St I think they go to the Big Ten simply to make the academic folks happy.

I think going to 18 in 2024 puts the SEC in a good place to either strategically pick their top 2 ACC schools in 2037 or take 6 if there’s enough programs there that could help compete the SEC and ESPN’s stranglehold of the South.

By 2037 I seriously question what kind of state some of those ACC programs are going to be in. College football’s following may be so weak in NC and VA that it doesn’t even make sense to go after them.

I think it’s smarter to lock in value programs now rather than hold open spots for team’s whose future value may be demonstrably lower by the time they actually become available on the market.

I tend to agree with the last remark about it being better to make that move than to wait. However, look at it from a UT perspective. If you hang back and let Oklahoma move to the Big 10 you accomplish many objectives some of which you never may speak openly. Recruiting in Texas is currently split between 9 nearby P5 schools all of which are in state, a state away, and play Texas schools annually: Arkansas, Baylor, Louisiana State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M, T.C.U., and Texas Tech. I forget who did the study but there was one done that said P5 schools ideally have an advantage when in their own home state population vs the number of P5 schools is 5,000,000 people to 1 P5 school. The state of Texas has 28 million people. They can support 5 P programs within the state which is exactly what they have. Add the population of Oklahoma and divide by 7 and there isn't enough. Add Arkansas moreso than L.S.U. and there certainly isn't enough without it affecting the number of solid recruits within the area.

If Texas lets Oklahoma head to the Big 10 and keeps the RRR with them, and joins the SEC with just Texas Tech they have given themselves every advantage in the future within their home state. They take away A&M's branding advantage, bring Tech doesn't cost them standing within their state, they effectively demote Baylor and T.C.U. to a conference beneath their new standing and cull Oklahoma State from the mix. They can share Houston with L.S.U. and share DFW with Arkansas and with only 3P schools in state all three Texas schools enhance the number of quality home recruits from which to draw. This isn't a strategy that one can discuss openly, but Texas has a vested interest in culling the number of P programs in state and reducing the exposure to top brands from out of state. Oklahoma in the Big 10 still has the annual game in DFW but getting Texas recruits to play at Oklahoma would get much harder for the Sooners to do only having the 1 game in Texas, whereas Texas will have joined a conference that gives them two old rivals back, limits the games in Texas to games between the 3 public P universities, and gives the Horns exposure into recruit rich Louisiana at a rate perhaps better than L.S.U.'s exposure into Texas and brings back the Hogs which their alumni fondly remember playing.

If Texas and Tech form the same 8 team division of the SEC West that Texas and Oklahoma might have formed it gives Texas all of the advantages without Oklahoma, but while keeping the historic game.

So I'm strongly suggesting that Oklahoma to the Big 10 without Texas may indeed be the outcome Texas wants, but will never speak of publicly.

(01-11-2021 02:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 02:28 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 02:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 01:59 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the SEC were to go to 18 with the Texlahoma 4 then I think the next step is 20 or 24 when the ACC GOR ends.

Right, however the reality of that would make the SEC less likely to move to 18. Do you really want to give up seats that easily now, when it may cost you solid opportunities for market expansion later?

Pro expansion with Texa-homa is that the SEC would dominate the old SWC market with those 4 schools plus Arkansas, A&M, & L.S.U. which is strong in Houston, like A&M. If it is about eyeballs then Texa-homa is worth more than an extra 2 slots for ACC schools.

The con side is that by giving up those two slots you might miss out of a deal that would land the top North Carolina schools. I'm not worried about F.S.U. and Clemson because if the ACC were getting raided those two are safer, wealthier, and their fan bases more secure in the SEC and neither has tag along baggage.

Good points.

If you’re thinking from a strictly SEC standpoint though isn’t there some fear that if you don’t accommodate TTU and OK St in 2024 that you could send say Oklahoma to the Big Ten. I think Oklahoma is itching to make a move and if it’s clear that neither the Big Ten or SEC will take Oklahoma St I think they go to the Big Ten simply to make the academic folks happy.

I think going to 18 in 2024 puts the SEC in a good place to either strategically pick their top 2 ACC schools in 2037 or take 6 if there’s enough programs there that could help compete the SEC and ESPN’s stranglehold of the South.

By 2037 I seriously question what kind of state some of those ACC programs are going to be in. College football’s following may be so weak in NC and VA that it doesn’t even make sense to go after them.

I think it’s smarter to lock in value programs now rather than hold open spots for team’s whose future value may be demonstrably lower by the time they actually become available on the market.

I tend to agree with the last remark about it being better to make that move than to wait. However, look at it from a UT perspective. If you hang back and let Oklahoma move to the Big 10 you accomplish many objectives some of which you never may speak openly. Recruiting in Texas is currently split between 9 nearby P5 schools all of which are in state, a state away, and play Texas schools annually: Arkansas, Baylor, Louisiana State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M, T.C.U., and Texas Tech. I forget who did the study but there was one done that said P5 schools ideally have an advantage when in their own home state population vs the number of P5 schools is 5,000,000 people to 1 P5 school. The state of Texas has 28 million people. They can support 5 P programs within the state which is exactly what they have. Add the population of Oklahoma and divide by 7 and there isn't enough. Add Arkansas moreso than L.S.U. and there certainly isn't enough without it affecting the number of solid recruits within the area.

If Texas lets Oklahoma head to the Big 10 and keeps the RRR with them, and joins the SEC with just Texas Tech they have given themselves every advantage in the future within their home state. They take away A&M's branding advantage, bring Tech doesn't cost them standing within their state, they effectively demote Baylor and T.C.U. to a conference beneath their new standing and cull Oklahoma State from the mix. They can share Houston with L.S.U. and share DFW with Arkansas and with only 3P schools in state all three Texas schools enhance the number of quality home recruits from which to draw. This isn't a strategy that one can discuss openly, but Texas has a vested interest in culling the number of P programs in state and reducing the exposure to top brands from out of state. Oklahoma in the Big 10 still has the annual game in DFW but getting Texas recruits to play at Oklahoma would get much harder for the Sooners to do only having the 1 game in Texas, whereas Texas will have joined a conference that gives them two old rivals back, limits the games in Texas to games between the 3 public P universities, and gives the Horns exposure into recruit rich Louisiana at a rate perhaps better than L.S.U.'s exposure into Texas and brings back the Hogs which their alumni fondly remember playing.

If Texas and Tech form the same 8 team division of the SEC West that Texas and Oklahoma might have formed it gives Texas all of the advantages without Oklahoma, but while keeping the historic game.

So I'm strongly suggesting that Oklahoma to the Big 10 without Texas may indeed be the outcome Texas wants, but will never speak of publicly.

Plus it gives NE a much needed shot with the return of ou in it's division. ou could still then continue scheduling teams in the DFW area (SMU/TCU) or Houston (UH/Rice) as part of it's OOC schedule as well.

With the success of the LSU game in Austin 2 years ago and the soon to be successful game in Fayetnam this fall, I bet the admin/boosters/alumni have conversations with the Hartzell (UT president) about joining the SEC.

(01-11-2021 03:12 PM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 02:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 02:28 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 02:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-11-2021 01:59 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the SEC were to go to 18 with the Texlahoma 4 then I think the next step is 20 or 24 when the ACC GOR ends.

Right, however the reality of that would make the SEC less likely to move to 18. Do you really want to give up seats that easily now, when it may cost you solid opportunities for market expansion later?

Pro expansion with Texa-homa is that the SEC would dominate the old SWC market with those 4 schools plus Arkansas, A&M, & L.S.U. which is strong in Houston, like A&M. If it is about eyeballs then Texa-homa is worth more than an extra 2 slots for ACC schools.

The con side is that by giving up those two slots you might miss out of a deal that would land the top North Carolina schools. I'm not worried about F.S.U. and Clemson because if the ACC were getting raided those two are safer, wealthier, and their fan bases more secure in the SEC and neither has tag along baggage.

Good points.

If you’re thinking from a strictly SEC standpoint though isn’t there some fear that if you don’t accommodate TTU and OK St in 2024 that you could send say Oklahoma to the Big Ten. I think Oklahoma is itching to make a move and if it’s clear that neither the Big Ten or SEC will take Oklahoma St I think they go to the Big Ten simply to make the academic folks happy.

I think going to 18 in 2024 puts the SEC in a good place to either strategically pick their top 2 ACC schools in 2037 or take 6 if there’s enough programs there that could help compete the SEC and ESPN’s stranglehold of the South.

By 2037 I seriously question what kind of state some of those ACC programs are going to be in. College football’s following may be so weak in NC and VA that it doesn’t even make sense to go after them.

I think it’s smarter to lock in value programs now rather than hold open spots for team’s whose future value may be demonstrably lower by the time they actually become available on the market.

I tend to agree with the last remark about it being better to make that move than to wait. However, look at it from a UT perspective. If you hang back and let Oklahoma move to the Big 10 you accomplish many objectives some of which you never may speak openly. Recruiting in Texas is currently split between 9 nearby P5 schools all of which are in state, a state away, and play Texas schools annually: Arkansas, Baylor, Louisiana State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M, T.C.U., and Texas Tech. I forget who did the study but there was one done that said P5 schools ideally have an advantage when in their own home state population vs the number of P5 schools is 5,000,000 people to 1 P5 school. The state of Texas has 28 million people. They can support 5 P programs within the state which is exactly what they have. Add the population of Oklahoma and divide by 7 and there isn't enough. Add Arkansas moreso than L.S.U. and there certainly isn't enough without it affecting the number of solid recruits within the area.

If Texas lets Oklahoma head to the Big 10 and keeps the RRR with them, and joins the SEC with just Texas Tech they have given themselves every advantage in the future within their home state. They take away A&M's branding advantage, bring Tech doesn't cost them standing within their state, they effectively demote Baylor and T.C.U. to a conference beneath their new standing and cull Oklahoma State from the mix. They can share Houston with L.S.U. and share DFW with Arkansas and with only 3P schools in state all three Texas schools enhance the number of quality home recruits from which to draw. This isn't a strategy that one can discuss openly, but Texas has a vested interest in culling the number of P programs in state and reducing the exposure to top brands from out of state. Oklahoma in the Big 10 still has the annual game in DFW but getting Texas recruits to play at Oklahoma would get much harder for the Sooners to do only having the 1 game in Texas, whereas Texas will have joined a conference that gives them two old rivals back, limits the games in Texas to games between the 3 public P universities, and gives the Horns exposure into recruit rich Louisiana at a rate perhaps better than L.S.U.'s exposure into Texas and brings back the Hogs which their alumni fondly remember playing.

If Texas and Tech form the same 8 team division of the SEC West that Texas and Oklahoma might have formed it gives Texas all of the advantages without Oklahoma, but while keeping the historic game.

So I'm strongly suggesting that Oklahoma to the Big 10 without Texas may indeed be the outcome Texas wants, but will never speak of publicly.

Plus it gives NE a much needed shot with the return of ou in it's division. ou could still then continue scheduling teams in the DFW area (SMU/TCU) or Houston (UH/Rice) as part of it's OOC schedule as well.

With the success of the LSU game in Austin 2 years ago and the soon to be successful game in Fayetnam this fall, I bet the admin/boosters/alumni have conversations with the Hartzell (UT president) about joining the SEC.

It is the most equitable win/win for OU and UT, the SEC and Big 10, and FOX and ESPN. The SEC gets the state of Texas in exchange for a division that suits Texas. ESPN keeps Texas in tow with control of the highest ad rates in a state of 28 million, The Big 10 gets to reunite a rivalry of consequence and gains a football blueblood, FOX benefits from that. Perhaps they benefit from blueblood Kansas joining with them. ESPN can utilize the AAC for Baylor and T.C.U. so they don't lose any ground in Texas, and it make sense to the fans.

Big 10 West:
Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Oklahoma, Wisconsin

Big 10 East:
Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

SEC West:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech

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

If Oklahoma and Kansas moved to the Big Ten then it does make sense for Texas and Texas Tech to move to the SEC together.

I also think it makes sense for ESPN to grab a school like TCU and put them in the ACC if Notre Dame is willing to join in football. The ACC would probably snub West Virginia and they wouldn't be valuable to anyone else.

However...let us consider what Texas and Oklahoma leaving the Big 12 could cause as far as a ripple effect.

Texas and Texas Tech would have a safe home in the SEC. Oklahoma and Kansas would fit pretty well with the Big Ten. But this sort of maneuver would still put a lot of pressure on Notre Dame and the ACC as a whole to some degree.

ESPN controls the destiny of the ACC, but they also want Big Ten rights. The package from the Big Ten is coming open about the same time the Big 12 GOR ends. That's strategic, of course, but we should also consider FOX's diminished position. They will still want content, but they've given up on pursuing certain properties. They've reduced their own platform and they've sold off the very studios that would have made a streaming service viable.

The ACC is in an inferior economic position without question and if both the SEC and Big Ten get another raise with significant powers coming on board then the leaders of the ACC will have to consider giving up the ghost. They have no means of making up the gap as things stand now and the addition of Notre Dame in football is only going to do so much. That's compounded by the length of the ACC contract.

So let's consider that one of the reasons that ESPN made the ACC sign such a long term deal is to have leverage over them. At this stage, ESPN could make those schools do just about anything because there's no help coming otherwise.

The ACC powers will desperately want an outlet. ESPN will be happy to give them one provided they do exactly what ESPN wants.

If you moved Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, and Virginia Tech to the SEC then you have a very solid 20.

If you moved Notre Dame, Virginia, North Carolina, and Duke to the Big Ten then you have another very solid 20.

That's not enough to break the ACC GOR, but it's no longer necessary because the ACC will be preserved by continuing on as a tweener league. They can keep making the same money they're making now(which isn't top dollar) and I don't think anyone would care.

East: Boston College, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Cincinnati
South: Miami, UCF, USF, NC State, Wake Forest
Central: Louisville, Memphis, Houston, Baylor, SMU
West: BYU, TCU, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State

I would prefer Texas and Oklahoma be in the same conference together and the Red River Rivalry remain a conference game. You can say they'd never cancel the game even if they weren't in the same conference but if I said in 2010 that Texas and Texas A&M would no longer play would you have believed me? What's stopping Texas from blackballing Oklahoma the way they blackballed A&M, especially if Oklahoma leaves the Big 12 before UT? Who needs Oklahoma/Texas more? The only way to guarantee they play is for them to play in the same conference.

I know it would be better financially for the Big 10 if OU/UT were in the B1G but geographically they fit better in the SEC and if they were there then Texas and Texas A&M would play again.