(01-27-2017 10:17 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-27-2017 08:23 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-27-2017 04:47 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-27-2017 03:53 AM)murrdcu Wrote:  Yes, the..."Missouri Compromise "...required certain rivalries be maintained before further expansion was allowed. If the SEC expands again it will face the same issues plus fight organizational issues in football. This is why I think either a pod model or yearly rivalries model with rotating conference members would be the only way to get approval for further expansion given current NCAA structural rules.

On a side note, if the B12 lost both OU and OSU to the SEC, I don't believe ESPN and Fox could afford to overpay the remaining eight B12 members at their projected current B12 payouts nor with any of last summer's exploded summer candidates.

I think the scrambling teams would look to join other conferences individually or as a group. Texas holds all the cards. They could go independent which would be great for football but terrible elsewhere athletically from a scheduling standpoint . They could add schools from the west like maybe from the low paying PAC. I think Kansas looks at both the B1G and SEC. WVU calls the SEC and ACC. The others are screwed or tied to Texas.

My guess to how the B12 could brake up would be:
1. OU and OSU join SEC at end of current TV contracts to avoid lawsuits for damages to the conference in case it collapses.

2a. Kansas and WVU join SEC after seeing pay cuts from new TV deal scenarios
2b. Texas joins PAC with Tech, Baylor, TCU

~~or~~


2a. B12 backfills with 2 schools to get back to ten members and accepts fair market value TV contract


Kansas could go B1G with all those academics and cornhuskers, but more of their rivals would be in the SEC.

I like the pod model at 16 and the rivalry issue is one of the reasons I don't really like 18 although I suppose I could live with it.

I think there's a remote possibility that Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and West Virginia are the ones we end up with although that's just me spitballing. My main reasoning is I think that's who ESPN wants to protect because of their large or at least regionally relevant fan bases.

Texas may end up being boxed in and make a move they might not otherwise prefer due to their rivals being in the SEC.

West: Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri

Central: LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

East: Auburn, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, West Virginia

Play 5 division mates...1 permanent rival from each...1 rotating match-up from each. That's 9 games.

New AAC forms...

Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Houston Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State, Memphis, Tulane, Cincinnati, UCF, USF, East Carolina, Temple, UConn, Navy

This is why Florida and South Carolina wanted their in state rivals in the SEC. It's also why the blackball group was fiction. Everyone knew in 1992 that 18 member or even 20 member conferences were not out of the question moving forward. I refer everyone to Jackie Sherrill's take on a 20 member conference, which you can still find through Google.

At 18 you are almost forced to play 10 conference games (networks like this). You play 5 from your division, rotate two from each of the other two divisions so that you play everyone every three years, and play 1 permanent rival. That leaves a slot for a rent-a-kill homecoming game and one slot for another P5 OOC.

Florida and South Carolina have both built athletic contributions into the acquisition of away games with their in state rivals. They wanted FSU & Clemson in if we expanded further. Florida sponsored FSU in '92 and offered to again in 2010. Spurrier and the AD at South Carolina were not opposed to Clemson. The reasons were simple. House members in both states wanted the other state school making SEC revenue, and both feared the ever increasing difficulty in scheduling their rivals if expansion continued. This is why Slive asked for the "gentlemen's agreement" not to push for membership of in state rivals until the renegotiation clause was activated by adding members from two new markets which is what had to be done before the SEC could activate their contract clause and get more money for the expansion in 2012.

We are no longer under those restrictions, but FSU and Clemson are now under a GOR until forever, and ESPN refuses to pay for their move.

So if we expand West and add 4 look for us to move to 10 conference games (5 division, 4 annual rotation, and 1 permanent rival). Other than that Medic's divisions work well. Tennessee could keep Kentucky as a permanent, Alabama could keep Auburn, and Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina could keep their OOC in state rivals on the schedule as the P5 OOC opponent. But, it's not perfect. Kentucky would have a hard time keeping Tennessee as a permanent rival and playing Louisville every year.

I do remember Jackie Sherrill's statement. You think there is a possibility of 6 out there right now that the SEC would take? A 6 that wouldn't involve ACC schools that is?

I'm not sure, but this would work for me...

West: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas

Central: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Ole Miss

South: Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky

East: Mississippi State, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, West Virginia

A little weird geographically, but I think it works better for preserving rivalries.

Play 4 division mates, 1 permanent rival from each other division, 1 rotating match-up from each other division. That's 10 games and you play everyone in the league at least once every 4 years. You've got 4 division winners for the conference semi-finals and you don't have to worry about tiebreakers to decide the 4th participant.

I think these divisions are pretty balanced regionally and competitively.

As for involving the ACC, probably not. Are there six we could take to move to 20? It's within the realm of possibility, but not likely. Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas, and West Virginia would be ideal for maximizing the markets left on the board. But if we ever went there then I think Texas would insist on another Texas school so WVU or ISU would be out.

I still think some version of Texa-homa would be the most likely.