JRsec
Super Moderator
Posts: 38,180
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7904
I Root For: SEC
Location: |
RE: Here's a New Piece on Realignment From a Big 10 Perspective Out of Rutgers
(07-03-2018 06:34 AM)Soobahk40050 Wrote: (07-03-2018 01:08 AM)JRsec Wrote: (07-03-2018 12:16 AM)AllTideUp Wrote: (07-02-2018 10:26 PM)JRsec Wrote: https://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index...f_big.html
This is a pretty nice assessment of things the Big 10 may be looking at. Naturally my take would be a little different from theirs, but I think this is worth reading and discussing. I find their assessments of several schools to be very accurate.
I think from the Big Ten's perspective, there aren't very many programs that make a lot of sense.
I could see them fudging on a second addition if the first one is a must have, but there's not much wiggle room.
What I found interesting is what I knew to be true from 2010. North Carolina and Duke prefer to be in the SEC (no matter what X says) if the are forced to move.
I still see the Big 10's move to 16 ideally being Virginia and Notre Dame.
I still see the SEC's ideal move to 16 being Texas and Oklahoma.
At 18 I could see the Big 10 taking a flyer on N.C. State and making a push for Georgia Tech.
I could see the SEC adding Duke and North Carolina to Texas and Oklahoma and feeling like it won the lottery.
But I don't think that would happen. I believe that Texas and Oklahoma would look at defections from the ACC and think wow, we can rebuild the Big 12.
If the SEC and Big 10 only moved to 16 and did so out of the ACC then perhaps Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Iowa State head to the PAC.
Now all three of the Big 10, SEC, and PAC are built with the brands and academic type schools they wanted.
But now a 4th Power conference makes sense.
Big Remnant:
Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian, Texas Tech
Boston College, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
Louisville, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
Now Notre Dame is all in, Baylor is out. And we stand at a fairly interesting 64.
Big 10:
Maryland, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia
Indiana, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Purdue
Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
SEC:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt
Duke, North Carolina, Tennessee, South Carolina
Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Mississippi State
Arkansas, L.S.U., Missouri, Texas A&M
PAC:
Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas
Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern Cal, Stanford
Now that would work. It wouldn't be unusual for West Virginia, T.C.U., Louisville/VaTech, Clemson/F.S.U. to meet in quarterfinals.
The rest of these set up nicely as well.
In the "summer excersise" I was surprised that even a "jewel" like UNC/Duke didn't meet the criteria for the SEC to expand with. While in other exercises I supported UNC/Clemson to the SEC, and as a TN fan I'm partial to VT, I do wonder if the SEC is actually better off with a stable ACC.
Grabbing OK/Texas/UNC/Duke would look good and feel like a win, but might not be the best option versus stopping at 16.
That being said, if it's about "protecting our territory" versus the Big 10 then a better case can be made.
That's a solid assessment that has driven the SEC for years.
The problem with the ACC is that there aren't many schools that match our emphasis and passion. And if you take those two (Clemson / Florida State) you so destabilize their value that it makes them vulnerable. Even Virginia Tech lacks that intensity. It's a great school that would fit us better than most, but they would never really be SEC like. I think the best case for Oklahoma is that they are.
But to your point, to open up the ACC would be to invite the Big 10 into it. The best possible long term move for the SEC to utilize to maintain absolute control over it's region is to take Oklahoma and Texas thereby denying the Big 10 access into the South to the West by denying them targets that are also suited to their profile, and by letting the ACC coexist to the East. That permits us to grow the least and accomplish the most. By taking just two schools we own everything of value West of Mississippi and by letting the ACC alone we have a huge buffer to prevent Big 10 incursion down the Atlantic Seaboard. So two additions cements us as the best paid and best branded conference in the nation hands down, allows us to cinch the Texas / Oklahoma market of 32 million. Adds impetus to our broadcasts in Spanish into 22 Mexican cities, and simultaneously permits the defense of our eastern and western flanks.
If we wanted to raid the ACC and protect ourselves then it would take a minimum of 8 schools, but more likely 10 schools to effectively keep the Big 10 out of our region.
It would require 3 schools from North Carolina, 2 schools from Virginia, 2 schools from Florida, Clemson and Georgia Tech and likely Louisville to round it out. That means 7 schools that don't really fit our profile and 9 schools that would either be break even or less than our current valuations.
I was playing around with this piece because it acknowledged what I already knew to be true, UNC and Duke wanted into the SEC in 2010, if the ACC fell apart. So I played around with it since if the Big 10 only went to 16 and did so with Virginia and N.D. that we would finally be able to have 64 schools in 4 conferences of 16 that actually had divisions that made some sense.
But clearly if the SEC lands just one of Texas or Oklahoma we are cemented into our current advantages. If we land both no other combinations would exist that could help our nearest competitor, the Big 10, catch us.
|
|
/
Here's a New Piece on Realignment From a Big 10 Perspective Out of Rutgers
