(01-02-2016 08:32 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-02-2016 06:53 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(01-01-2016 10:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-01-2016 09:20 PM)XLance Wrote:  18 team conferences?
There would be room only for two. I like 3 pods of 6.

B1G
Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Northwestern, Michigan and Michigan State
Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Purdue, Indiana and Illinois
Ohio State, Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers, Virginia Tech and NC State

SEC
Tejas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Arkansas, and LSU
Alabama, Mississippi State, Ole Miss, Vanderbilt, Florida State, Louisville/West Virginia
Florida, Auburn, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Kentucky

The PAC stays the same at 12

The ACC also becomes a 12 team conference
Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Wake Forest, Carolina, Dook, UVa, Notre Dame, Pitt, Syracuse, Boston College, and UConn/West Virginia/Louisville.

Now that's a bit more creative. I will think on this.

It's a clever way of shedding the "burden" of having to protect NC State's interest without risking the possibility of losing the Walmart fans in that state. State gets to have their own TAMU moment but through going north, instead.

One drawback is I don't think ND would do a full membership. ND might continue their association with the ACC that would be more tight than they had with the Big East with some changes. Louisville would be an interesting case, as I am not sure whether they would pick being in an expanded SEC with Texas and Oklahoma over the basketball prestige of the ACC. In that hypothetical, they may end up letting the SEC make the decision for them. I doubt a basketball-focused ACC would pick WVU over UCONN due to academic consideration. Maybe Cincinnati over the other two to smooth any tensions.

Louisville, UNC, Duke, UVA, GT, Miami, Clemson, Syracuse, Pitt, BC, Wake, Cincinnati/Connecticut

Also interesting that State lists several Big Ten universities (including the two newbies) as peers. Both State and VPI have been close or knocking on the door of AAU. Doesn't mean they get in but would not be surprised if they do within thirty years.

I think that's right. In that scenario I think the SEC takes West Virginia. I also think it would be an extremely smart move by Oklahoma and Texas and here's why. In the 60's the Longhorns dominated Texas football. In the 60's every kid in the state played. That's not so anymore and things really began to shift in the 80's reaching a peak in the 2000's. There are simply too many P5 Texas programs right now and adding Houston would be make it only worse. The pool of talent is shrinking along with the popularity for playing the game in High School. The days of including T.C.U., Baylor, Houston, and Rice as in the old SWC days are over. The result has been the diminishing talent of Texas, A&M, and Oklahoma all three of which are historically strong programs who have suffered enormously under the demographic and cultural shifts in the availability of talent.

Does that mean that the state of Texas is no longer a top talent producer? In no way do I mean that. But it does mean that the state of Texas can no longer support 6 large programs in the state, and endure the cherry-picking of everyone else, and maintain any kind of dominance in the sport.

By moving Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State to the SEC not only do they reunite with historic rivals A&M and Arkansas, but they distance themselves brand wise from the rest. Let Kansas head to the Big 10. In an SEC Western division minus Alabama who would move East the Horns and Sooners could rise again with A&M to be the three who would challenge for football prominence. They also would be there with L.S.U. and Arkansas for content games that their fans would look forward to each year.

If Texas wants to keep its fiefdom in state they are not only cutting their own throats but those of long time rival Oklahoma and hindering their in state rival A&M.

By letting Virginia Tech and N.C. State go to the Big 10 North Carolina and Virginia increase their in state presence and prominence, while giving the Big 10 some much needed recruiting grounds.

Moving forward the BTN is going to be more married to markets than the SECN which will likely be able to morph to streaming a bit more through their content. Adding Texas, Oklahoma and Florida State to that content value would be a huge and very popular regional move. I do think that this is a workable solution in that N.D. gets more of what it would want.

As usual the rub will be the Horns. With the ACC grouping the pressure would be on Clemson to make the jump to the SEC as well. I think it is the only school that would be left in the ACC that would suffer a fairly severe internal conflict on that matter.

JR Texas Tech was not included. They are too far west to effect the overall Texas market and the bulk of the Texas population which would be completely blanketed by Tejas and A&M.
If you think them necessary they could be substituted for West Virginia/Louisville BUT I still contend that Kentucky is the weak link for the SEC (because of location) and something must be done to shore up the northern flank of the conference (hence West Virginia or Louisville).