(08-29-2014 06:50 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-29-2014 04:54 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(08-29-2014 04:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-28-2014 11:14 PM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 05:01 PM)cardshouse Wrote:  The only conference the SEC will destroy is the Big 12. They could have a nice western division via the Big 12. The SEC really doesn't need anyone else because they own the football market.

The SEC could also have a nice eastern division via the ACC. It goes both ways. It's correct the SEC does not need to add anyone, but they will add at least 2 schools, eventually, because 16 (or 20) is much easier and fairer to schedule and there are more options to make extra conference money at 16 (or 20) schools. Same for the B1G. Both will have extra leverage because the SECN and new B1G T1 will put them financially well ahead of the B12, and especially the ACC.

I do think realignment could come from either the East or West, but if, and when it does the moves will be in order to secure more overt property for ESPN. Should the SEC receive Virginia Tech and N.C. State it will do so only in order to make room for revenue enhancing brands for the ACC and to assimilate duplicated properties in the ACC into a conference that profits ESPN more in the SEC.

If the SEC expands to the West it will be in a bigger move that will also involve the ACC in order to acquire fuller rights to properties in the Big 12. These will be network moves more so than conference moves.

If Texas and Oklahoma both move to the ACC it would be huge to boost their credibility in football. But if the two top brands both go ACC look for the SEC to be compensated to the East and for Texas to come with Tech and Oklahoma to come with OSU to the ACC.

If the SEC expands with two Big 12 schools I look for Oklahoma to be one of them. The other could then be one of 4 or 5 schools, but not Texas.

My money has always been on Oklahoma and Baylor.

IMO Texas moves to the ACC as a last resort (with Notre Dame).
Face it Texas would like to reassemble the SWC and play 80-90% of their games within the state of Texas.
Texas is now a prisoner of their own success. Too good to go anywhere else but not good enough (or generous enough) to share enough wealth to re-invite Nebraska or Missouri (or Arkansas).
So will this give hope to Rice, SMU and Houston (and BYU/New Mexico)? Texas has enough money to wait out the answer

I wholeheartedly disagree with the sentiment about Texas wanting to go back in time. Just the opposite, they show with their conference move and with their OOC scheduling that they are thinking National more than ever.

They definitely will want to maintain their presence within the State of Texas.

That is what is so perfect about a partial membership for Texas with the ACC. They can go to having 6 OOC games and 6 games with the ACC. If they get two other Texas teams into the ACC and are able to get a similar agreement with the ACC that Notre Dame passed on then that means two of those six ACC games would likely be against the two Texas teams that joined the ACC.

One OOC game against Oklahoma, which I count as a Texas game due to the RRR being at the Fairgrounds. One OOC game against Texas Tech. One OOC game against a California team every year. One OOC game against Notre Dame. That leaves two slots which potentially could both be from Texas.

That means six Texas games a year and likely Notre Dame in Texas on some years for a seventh.

They can have the best of both worlds. They can have an extremely strong presence in Texas while at the same time nationalizing themselves into the areas they want to be in.

H1, I don't think that the ACC would take Texas as a partial member.....one is enough. What I would look for is Texas going to the PAC if they want to go anywhere as a partial.