Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 24,744
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2560
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #1881
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(03-03-2020 05:37 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(03-02-2020 06:07 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(03-02-2020 04:42 PM)XLance Wrote:  Things have changed.
When ESPN completed the purchase of the SEC, things changed.
I now think that it is possible for Texas actually consider membership in the SEC.
I was re-reading an article from a little over a year ago and the thing that struck me was that the SEC, now has the same relationship with ESPN as does the ACC, which because of geography, would make a compelling argument for ESPN in trying to convince the Longhorns to move to the SEC.

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Jour...ports.aspx

If Texas ultimately decides to stray from the Big 12, that’s where things get interesting, and a bit chaotic.

"The most compelling scenario has the Longhorns becoming an independent in football, a la Notre Dame. By being in business with ESPN, which is paying the school $300 million over 20 years for the Longhorn Network rights through 2030, the Longhorns have a ready-made media partner that would ensure maximum exposure.
Texas is probably the only other school in the nation, along with Notre Dame, that could thrive as an independent because it has a blue-chip brand, a national following and a built-in media partner.

Some administrators in the college space argue that the Longhorns already enjoy quasi-independent status in the Big 12, based on their freedom to have their own network, while also enjoying the scheduling benefits of being in a conference.

If Texas looked for another conference, the ACC and Big Ten loom as the most likely landing spots. Remember, Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany and ACC Commissioner John Swofford were the first movers during the last round of realignment, both making surprise moves that put Nebraska in the Big Ten and Notre Dame in the ACC.

But what would happen to the Longhorn Network? Texas’ contract stipulates that the network must live on, even if UT leaves the Big 12.

The ACC’s alliance with ESPN makes the ACC a potential destination if the Longhorns go looking. ESPN owns all of the ACC’s media rights, which would make it easier to either absorb the ESPN-owned Longhorn Network or develop another option."

They are Texas. They will want some concessions. The only concession we will likely give them is their preference of a travel mate. It is the only reason I discuss Tech.

After all of this time, looking at a real opportunity to land the White Whale, you are concerned about concessions?
Your insecurities are starting to peek through your arrogant facade.

I'm hardly concerned about concessions X, just noting the obvious. And I'm certainly not insecure over a pass time. And arrogant and confident are two different things. And if a Tar Heel who is an apologist for the academic fraud at UNC passes judgment on me for being arrogant, I can live with that projection.
03-03-2020 11:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OdinFrigg Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 686
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 32
I Root For: GA/SC/MSU/GaSou
Location:
Post: #1882
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
Unlike Notre Dame, Texas does not have a significant history with playing ACC schools in football, basketball, and baseball, other than rare bowl matchups, tournament encounters, and random scheduling by individual schools over long periods of time. The travel distances and the geography doesn't lend itself to a natural fit.

Frankly, Texas is fretting and projecting being coy. Their attitude always gets in the way.

As to the ACC, a situation of housing two prominent schools that refuse to give their all to the conference in football, is not a characterization of strength. The BIG, SEC, and PAC12 would not accommodate a hybrid situation unless it is for one olympic-style team sport whereby the conference doesn't have the full contingent of conference members sponsoring the sport.

Notre Dame doesn't want to be in the BIG; and Texas in the past has rejected the SEC. Fine, but don't contribute to the enabling.
(This post was last modified: 03-03-2020 03:08 PM by OdinFrigg.)
03-03-2020 03:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 24,744
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2560
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #1883
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(03-03-2020 03:05 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Unlike Notre Dame, Texas does not have a significant history with playing ACC schools in football, basketball, and baseball, other than rare bowl matchups, tournament encounters, and random scheduling by individual schools over long periods of time. The travel distances and the geography doesn't lend itself to a natural fit.

Frankly, Texas is fretting and projecting being coy. Their attitude always gets in the way.

As to the ACC, a situation of housing two prominent schools that refuse to give their all to the conference in football, is not a characterization of strength. The BIG, SEC, and PAC12 would not accommodate a hybrid situation unless it is for one olympic-style team sport whereby the conference doesn't have the full contingent of conference members sponsoring the sport.

Notre Dame doesn't want to be in the BIG; and Texas in the past has rejected the SEC. Fine, but don't contribute to the enabling.
I simply don't see any enabling on the part of the SEC and haven't ever seen it in realignment. If a pair of Texas schools adds significantly to our bottom line and that is the best we can do it still profits. If we can do better we will.
03-03-2020 03:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 82
I Root For: Not ESEACCPN
Location:
Post: #1884
If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
I wonder if the foursome would be Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Florida State would that be better than any other combo. Kansas would be a better upgrade to Texas Tech, assuming that UT can leave TT behind. It would come down to between Kansas and Clemson. Clemson is more regional to the original SEC schools but Kansas has that brand power that the SEC would love to boost its basketball acumen and would have to leave K-State and I-State behind, whereas Clemson would double up in a small state.

Not to mention side stepping the second-school issues in Texas and Oklahoma as well.

Also, Florida State has steadily improved their basketball since joining the ACC, so they can slide right into it and compete for titles straight away.

Division-wise, this makes a whole lot of sense:

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


All the "newbies" would stay in the West and not have to intrude on the original members until the conference playoffs, basically a truncated Big8/SWC division and regional rivals put together.

Whatever is left of the ACC would look at USF or UCF for potential replacements.
03-11-2020 02:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AllTideUp Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,803
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 209
I Root For: Alabama
Location:
Post: #1885
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(03-11-2020 02:33 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  I wonder if the foursome would be Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Florida State would that be better than any other combo. Kansas would be a better upgrade to Texas Tech, assuming that UT can leave TT behind. It would come down to between Kansas and Clemson. Clemson is more regional to the original SEC schools but Kansas has that brand power that the SEC would love to boost its basketball acumen and would have to leave K-State and I-State behind, whereas Clemson would double up in a small state.

Not to mention side stepping the second-school issues in Texas and Oklahoma as well.

Also, Florida State has steadily improved their basketball since joining the ACC, so they can slide right into it and compete for titles straight away.

Division-wise, this makes a whole lot of sense:

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


All the "newbies" would stay in the West and not have to intrude on the original members until the conference playoffs, basically a truncated Big8/SWC division and regional rivals put together.

Whatever is left of the ACC would look at USF or UCF for potential replacements.

That would be a great combo, but I don't see us cracking both leagues at the same time. That is, unless ESPN is really doing some wheeling and dealing behind the scenes.

I'll throw this out there...

I think we can reasonably assume that Texas will be interested in bringing Texas Tech with them because of political and economic factors. Hopefully, Oklahoma is still an option and Kansas makes a fine traveling partner at that point.

We in the SEC have to consider though what we want from the ACC and whether or not we have a reasonable shot at getting it in the next decade. What if it's a matter that it simply won't happen because ESPN has eyes on maintaining the ACC long term? What do we do then? Do we let it go and just count our money or make a move that would alter our future with regard to economics and politics again?

What if we took South Florida and Central Florida?

We'd have 3 schools in the state of FL, but we'd also have the vast majority of their research-based college enrollment. As the decades pass, these schools might end up becoming more significant than Florida State anyway so should we groom them in the SEC? Or just wait for the ACC to crumble...because by that point those old ACC properties might not be so hot anyway.
03-11-2020 02:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 24,744
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2560
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #1886
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(03-11-2020 02:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(03-11-2020 02:33 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  I wonder if the foursome would be Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Florida State would that be better than any other combo. Kansas would be a better upgrade to Texas Tech, assuming that UT can leave TT behind. It would come down to between Kansas and Clemson. Clemson is more regional to the original SEC schools but Kansas has that brand power that the SEC would love to boost its basketball acumen and would have to leave K-State and I-State behind, whereas Clemson would double up in a small state.

Not to mention side stepping the second-school issues in Texas and Oklahoma as well.

Also, Florida State has steadily improved their basketball since joining the ACC, so they can slide right into it and compete for titles straight away.

Division-wise, this makes a whole lot of sense:

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


All the "newbies" would stay in the West and not have to intrude on the original members until the conference playoffs, basically a truncated Big8/SWC division and regional rivals put together.

Whatever is left of the ACC would look at USF or UCF for potential replacements.

That would be a great combo, but I don't see us cracking both leagues at the same time. That is, unless ESPN is really doing some wheeling and dealing behind the scenes.

I'll throw this out there...

I think we can reasonably assume that Texas will be interested in bringing Texas Tech with them because of political and economic factors. Hopefully, Oklahoma is still an option and Kansas makes a fine traveling partner at that point.

We in the SEC have to consider though what we want from the ACC and whether or not we have a reasonable shot at getting it in the next decade. What if it's a matter that it simply won't happen because ESPN has eyes on maintaining the ACC long term? What do we do then? Do we let it go and just count our money or make a move that would alter our future with regard to economics and politics again?

What if we took South Florida and Central Florida?

We'd have 3 schools in the state of FL, but we'd also have the vast majority of their research-based college enrollment. As the decades pass, these schools might end up becoming more significant than Florida State anyway so should we groom them in the SEC? Or just wait for the ACC to crumble...because by that point those old ACC properties might not be so hot anyway.

I don't think we nee both Florida schools to have what we need. So I might suggest that if the SEC took Texas, Kansas, and Oklahoma why not offer just South Florida. It gives us a central to south Florida location on the Gulf side of the State with the best research school of the two. UCF offers a larger enrollment, USF gives us a better base with better research.

The likelihood we would be this forward thinking is remote at best though since most of realignment is about what can you do for me now, not what can you do for me in 10 or 20 years.
03-11-2020 02:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OdinFrigg Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 686
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 32
I Root For: GA/SC/MSU/GaSou
Location:
Post: #1887
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(03-03-2020 03:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(03-03-2020 03:05 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Unlike Notre Dame, Texas does not have a significant history with playing ACC schools in football, basketball, and baseball, other than rare bowl matchups, tournament encounters, and random scheduling by individual schools over long periods of time. The travel distances and the geography doesn't lend itself to a natural fit.

Frankly, Texas is fretting and projecting being coy. Their attitude always gets in the way.

As to the ACC, a situation of housing two prominent schools that refuse to give their all to the conference in football, is not a characterization of strength. The BIG, SEC, and PAC12 would not accommodate a hybrid situation unless it is for one olympic-style team sport whereby the conference doesn't have the full contingent of conference members sponsoring the sport.

Notre Dame doesn't want to be in the BIG; and Texas in the past has rejected the SEC. Fine, but don't contribute to the enabling.
I simply don't see any enabling on the part of the SEC and haven't ever seen it in realignment. If a pair of Texas schools adds significantly to our bottom line and that is the best we can do it still profits. If we can do better we will.
The SEC is scheduling games with Notre Dame (UGA, Ark., etc.). That is part of helping ND with prominent, national, and independent scheduling. ND had a seat at the BCS table equal to a full conference. That dynamic shifted to the P5. ND coming into the BE as non-fb member was realignment. ND promising the BE four or five fb games a year, but didn't deliver, was a contributing factor, among multiple ones, that led to the demise of BE fb and realignment. The ACC adding ND as a member, with a 5 game per year fb, was realignment. One can view the deal as may fit a certain narrative, but it was "special" and certainly realignment. It was USC's and Stanford's demand to retain ND as a yearly fb opponent that killed a scheduling agreement between the PAC12 and the BIG.
I give Notre Dame credit, they are savvy, clever, and prevail, usually, at negotiating. The Swoffords of conference organizations are no match for ND.
03-12-2020 08:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 82
I Root For: Not ESEACCPN
Location:
Post: #1888
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(03-11-2020 02:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(03-11-2020 02:33 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  I wonder if the foursome would be Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Florida State would that be better than any other combo. Kansas would be a better upgrade to Texas Tech, assuming that UT can leave TT behind. It would come down to between Kansas and Clemson. Clemson is more regional to the original SEC schools but Kansas has that brand power that the SEC would love to boost its basketball acumen and would have to leave K-State and I-State behind, whereas Clemson would double up in a small state.

Not to mention side stepping the second-school issues in Texas and Oklahoma as well.

Also, Florida State has steadily improved their basketball since joining the ACC, so they can slide right into it and compete for titles straight away.

Division-wise, this makes a whole lot of sense:

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


All the "newbies" would stay in the West and not have to intrude on the original members until the conference playoffs, basically a truncated Big8/SWC division and regional rivals put together.

Whatever is left of the ACC would look at USF or UCF for potential replacements.

That would be a great combo, but I don't see us cracking both leagues at the same time. That is, unless ESPN is really doing some wheeling and dealing behind the scenes.

I'll throw this out there...

I think we can reasonably assume that Texas will be interested in bringing Texas Tech with them because of political and economic factors. Hopefully, Oklahoma is still an option and Kansas makes a fine traveling partner at that point.

We in the SEC have to consider though what we want from the ACC and whether or not we have a reasonable shot at getting it in the next decade. What if it's a matter that it simply won't happen because ESPN has eyes on maintaining the ACC long term? What do we do then? Do we let it go and just count our money or make a move that would alter our future with regard to economics and politics again?

What if we took South Florida and Central Florida?

We'd have 3 schools in the state of FL, but we'd also have the vast majority of their research-based college enrollment. As the decades pass, these schools might end up becoming more significant than Florida State anyway so should we groom them in the SEC? Or just wait for the ACC to crumble...because by that point those old ACC properties might not be so hot anyway.

This is working on the theory expounded by JRsec that both the Big 12 and ACC would eventually be opened up by the SEC and Big 10, respectively. So if they're going to be opened up and quality programs are leaving then it's possible that the SEC would get something in the East. But if you're right and Disney intends to protect the ACC then you win realignment by the fact that all other options for the Big 10 to add are unavailable.
03-14-2020 05:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 24,744
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2560
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #1889
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(03-14-2020 05:38 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(03-11-2020 02:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(03-11-2020 02:33 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  I wonder if the foursome would be Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Florida State would that be better than any other combo. Kansas would be a better upgrade to Texas Tech, assuming that UT can leave TT behind. It would come down to between Kansas and Clemson. Clemson is more regional to the original SEC schools but Kansas has that brand power that the SEC would love to boost its basketball acumen and would have to leave K-State and I-State behind, whereas Clemson would double up in a small state.

Not to mention side stepping the second-school issues in Texas and Oklahoma as well.

Also, Florida State has steadily improved their basketball since joining the ACC, so they can slide right into it and compete for titles straight away.

Division-wise, this makes a whole lot of sense:

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


All the "newbies" would stay in the West and not have to intrude on the original members until the conference playoffs, basically a truncated Big8/SWC division and regional rivals put together.

Whatever is left of the ACC would look at USF or UCF for potential replacements.

That would be a great combo, but I don't see us cracking both leagues at the same time. That is, unless ESPN is really doing some wheeling and dealing behind the scenes.

I'll throw this out there...

I think we can reasonably assume that Texas will be interested in bringing Texas Tech with them because of political and economic factors. Hopefully, Oklahoma is still an option and Kansas makes a fine traveling partner at that point.

We in the SEC have to consider though what we want from the ACC and whether or not we have a reasonable shot at getting it in the next decade. What if it's a matter that it simply won't happen because ESPN has eyes on maintaining the ACC long term? What do we do then? Do we let it go and just count our money or make a move that would alter our future with regard to economics and politics again?

What if we took South Florida and Central Florida?

We'd have 3 schools in the state of FL, but we'd also have the vast majority of their research-based college enrollment. As the decades pass, these schools might end up becoming more significant than Florida State anyway so should we groom them in the SEC? Or just wait for the ACC to crumble...because by that point those old ACC properties might not be so hot anyway.

This is working on the theory expounded by JRsec that both the Big 12 and ACC would eventually be opened up by the SEC and Big 10, respectively. So if they're going to be opened up and quality programs are leaving then it's possible that the SEC would get something in the East. But if you're right and Disney intends to protect the ACC then you win realignment by the fact that all other options for the Big 10 to add are unavailable.

Cracking both conferences is also the best way to rebuild one. Truly do your study work on Football valuations and you'll see that there are 6 ACC schools below their own conference's average.

Duke, Wake Forest, Boston College, Pittsburgh, Syracuse and Virginia aren't adding value to the ACC, they are taking it away (in terms of football value).

I'd submit that B.C., Pitt, and Syracuse would be happier back in the OBE. Each school has suffered diminished hoops and football in the ACC. The football programs could go independent. Perhaps Wake join them and rebuild a football conference with some of the best of the AAC.

Let's say that Texas and Oklahoma stay put. Florida State, Clemson, Miami, and Georgia Tech joins them. Let's say that Kansas, Missouri, Iowa State, and Virginia move to the Big 10. And let's say that Duke, North Carolina and N.C. State move to the SEC along with Virginia Tech and T.C.U.. Now lets say that Louisville joins the Big 12 and Notre Dame joins them as a partial.

You have the Big 10 looking like this:
Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Virginia
Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska

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

Why? The Ole Miss game is important to Vanderbilt and Ole Miss is important to L.S.U. and we can keep 1 protected rival.

Big 12:
Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, West Virginia

The PAC remains at 12.

The Big East re-emerges:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Temple
Central Florida, Memphis, Houston, South Florida, Tulane, Wake Forest

These become the football schools of new Big East but note even the football schools have formidable basketball with minor exceptions.

Now you have 5 conferences of 72 schools. All 5 get an AQ for their champion. 3 at large slots round out a CFP of 8.
05-04-2020 08:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 82
I Root For: Not ESEACCPN
Location:
Post: #1890
If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
If Disney wants to save the Big 12 there are two moves that they could make that not only secures the Big 12 footprint but also the Western footprint in general.

First, pay the ACC enough money to take in West Virginia. In the new media world, WVU shoots up in value. So bring them in and put them in to play Louisville, Miami, Syracuse and Pitt every season. XLance gets his 15 team conference.

West Virginia, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Miami
Clemson, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina State
Boston College, Wake Forest, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia

With an extra slot open, the Big 12 goes to kill off the PAC 12, taking in all the critical public schools from that conference. Washington, Oregon, California, UCLA, Arizona State, Utah and Colorado move over.

Washington, Oregon, California, UCLA, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado, Texas Tech
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Oklahoma, Texas, TCU, Baylor

I could see Stanford and USC going the independence route, perhaps taking a football deal with the ACC for exposure in the Eastern markets, to leave them with enough weeks to play their public school counterparts. Their Olympic sports can stay local.
06-29-2020 10:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 24,744
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2560
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #1891
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(06-29-2020 10:07 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  If Disney wants to save the Big 12 there are two moves that they could make that not only secures the Big 12 footprint but also the Western footprint in general.

First, pay the ACC enough money to take in West Virginia. In the new media world, WVU shoots up in value. So bring them in and put them in to play Louisville, Miami, Syracuse and Pitt every season. XLance gets his 15 team conference.

West Virginia, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Miami
Clemson, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina State
Boston College, Wake Forest, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia

With an extra slot open, the Big 12 goes to kill off the PAC 12, taking in all the critical public schools from that conference. Washington, Oregon, California, UCLA, Arizona State, Utah and Colorado move over.

Washington, Oregon, California, UCLA, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado, Texas Tech
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Oklahoma, Texas, TCU, Baylor

I could see Stanford and USC going the independence route, perhaps taking a football deal with the ACC for exposure in the Eastern markets, to leave them with enough weeks to play their public school counterparts. Their Olympic sports can stay local.

Why not surrender T.C.U. to the SEC as a second Texas school and surrender West Virginia to the ACC.

Then they could add 8 from the PAC:
Arizona, Arizona State, California, California Los Angeles, Colorado, Oregon, Utah, Washington
Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

That leaves Baylor as the private necessary to cover freedom of information issues.

And Southern Cal and Stanford join this conference as partials.

So the ACC is at 15 plus a partial, the SEC is at 15, Big12/PAC is at 16 and 2 partials, and the Big 10 is at 14.
06-29-2020 10:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 82
I Root For: Not ESEACCPN
Location:
Post: #1892
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(06-29-2020 10:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(06-29-2020 10:07 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  If Disney wants to save the Big 12 there are two moves that they could make that not only secures the Big 12 footprint but also the Western footprint in general.

First, pay the ACC enough money to take in West Virginia. In the new media world, WVU shoots up in value. So bring them in and put them in to play Louisville, Miami, Syracuse and Pitt every season. XLance gets his 15 team conference.

West Virginia, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Miami
Clemson, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina State
Boston College, Wake Forest, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia

With an extra slot open, the Big 12 goes to kill off the PAC 12, taking in all the critical public schools from that conference. Washington, Oregon, California, UCLA, Arizona State, Utah and Colorado move over.

Washington, Oregon, California, UCLA, Arizona State, Utah, Colorado, Texas Tech
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Oklahoma, Texas, TCU, Baylor

I could see Stanford and USC going the independence route, perhaps taking a football deal with the ACC for exposure in the Eastern markets, to leave them with enough weeks to play their public school counterparts. Their Olympic sports can stay local.

Why not surrender T.C.U. to the SEC as a second Texas school and surrender West Virginia to the ACC.

Then they could add 8 from the PAC:
Arizona, Arizona State, California, California Los Angeles, Colorado, Oregon, Utah, Washington
Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech

That leaves Baylor as the private necessary to cover freedom of information issues.

And Southern Cal and Stanford join this conference as partials.

So the ACC is at 15 plus a partial, the SEC is at 15, Big12/PAC is at 16 and 2 partials, and the Big 10 is at 14.

That would smooth out things a bit more. Also, the great irony of the last two Big 12 additions being key to unlock everything else.
06-30-2020 05:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 24,744
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 2560
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #1893
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
If we had to do a total reshuffle this might not be a bad way to break into 4 divisions of 15 each.

Big West
Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Texas, Texas Tech
California, California Los Angeles, Oregon, Utah, Washington
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

SEC
Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee
Alabama, Florida State, Mississippi State, Kentucky, South Carolina
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Missouri, Texas A&M

Big 10
Maryland, N.C. State, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia Tech
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

Privates & Publics
Baylor, Notre Dame, Southern Cal, Stanford , T.C.U.
Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia
Northwestern, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
(This post was last modified: 07-03-2020 06:09 PM by JRsec.)
07-03-2020 12:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,504
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 82
I Root For: Not ESEACCPN
Location:
Post: #1894
If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
Upon looking at this idea, I can't find much to criticize. One can quibble in places but the meeting of specific interests is there. The PAC (or whatever emerges out of it) needs UT, OU and KU more than the other conferences apart from the Big 12. The Big Ten needs access to more markets and the institutions named, even without the AAU designation, match what they'd like (not to mention the way into the Research Triangle without having to take a small private as a tag-along). The 4th conference is interesting, just for the various factions involved. You have the ND/Stanford/USC faction, the GT/UNC/Duke/UVa faction and the former Big East faction including WVU. It's basically a national ACC sans the major public schools.
07-12-2020 12:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.