(05-11-2017 10:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I think we are approaching this the wrong way with regards to the SEC and ACC and who we should take.

The ACC needs Notre Dame plus 3 to get to 18, or 4 to get to 18 while N.D. keeps its special arrangement.

The SEC needs 4 to get to 18.

If Baylor is sanctioned and lose their vote, or worse get kicked out, the Big 12 would stand at 9. They would, by NCAA precedent, have two years to get back up to 10 before they lose rights given at the membership level of 10 (right now that is a potential CCG). Two years would be all they would need to set up moves.

So our question should be how should the SEC divide the 7 required schools so that dissolution would be possible without Baylor's vote or presence and if Baylor still has full membership should we look to take 8 and leave N.D. as a partial?

I'd say Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State, and Oklahoma State to the SEC.

Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech and West Virginia to the ACC at 4. Drop West Virginia at 3.

But this might make for a fun debate.

Dividing the Big 12 to allow the conference to be dissolved:

Here's your out-of-the-box solution.

ACC moves to 18 with Notre Dame, Missouri, Iowa State and Kansas

SEC moves to 18 with West Virginia, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas and Texas Tech

(05-13-2017 07:53 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 10:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I think we are approaching this the wrong way with regards to the SEC and ACC and who we should take.

The ACC needs Notre Dame plus 3 to get to 18, or 4 to get to 18 while N.D. keeps its special arrangement.

The SEC needs 4 to get to 18.

If Baylor is sanctioned and lose their vote, or worse get kicked out, the Big 12 would stand at 9. They would, by NCAA precedent, have two years to get back up to 10 before they lose rights given at the membership level of 10 (right now that is a potential CCG). Two years would be all they would need to set up moves.

So our question should be how should the SEC divide the 7 required schools so that dissolution would be possible without Baylor's vote or presence and if Baylor still has full membership should we look to take 8 and leave N.D. as a partial?

I'd say Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State, and Oklahoma State to the SEC.

Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech and West Virginia to the ACC at 4. Drop West Virginia at 3.

But this might make for a fun debate.

Dividing the Big 12 to allow the conference to be dissolved:

Here's your out-of-the-box solution.

ACC moves to 18 with Notre Dame, Missouri, Iowa State and Kansas

SEC moves to 18 with West Virginia, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas and Texas Tech

I'll take JR option. The ACC needs football brands (Texas) more than basketball brands (Kansas).

(05-12-2017 10:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 10:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 10:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I think we are approaching this the wrong way with regards to the SEC and ACC and who we should take.

The ACC needs Notre Dame plus 3 to get to 18, or 4 to get to 18 while N.D. keeps its special arrangement.

The SEC needs 4 to get to 18.

If Baylor is sanctioned and lose their vote, or worse get kicked out, the Big 12 would stand at 9. They would, by NCAA precedent, have two years to get back up to 10 before they lose rights given at the membership level of 10 (right now that is a potential CCG). Two years would be all they would need to set up moves.

So our question should be how should the SEC divide the 7 required schools so that dissolution would be possible without Baylor's vote or presence and if Baylor still has full membership should we look to take 8 and leave N.D. as a partial?

I'd say Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State, and Oklahoma State to the SEC.

Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech and West Virginia to the ACC at 4. Drop West Virginia at 3.

But this might make for a fun debate.

I think Baylor is still going to be in the mix though. The NCAA got burned in the sphere of public opinion when they went after Penn State. Many people felt they overstepped their bounds. In fact, the NCAA walked back a lot of the sanctions over time.

I'm not sure what authority the Feds have to bring the hammer down on Baylor. Perhaps they have more leeway to do something, not sure.

Anyway, I think the linchpin may have to be something else.

They are going to get hit for violations of Title IX and violations of the Clery Act by the Feds. The cover up goes clearly to the presidents office. The NCAA will have access to the Fed's investigations. If they follow up with severe sanctions I doubt Baylor will have much recourse in disputing the findings of a Federal Court. S.M.U. and Penn State didn't face that. S.M.U. because it was just corrupt athletic practices and Penn State because the State government made pursuing the case difficult. Baylor will have no such cover, and they have the righteous indignation of a boat load of Texas Baptist's to contend with if they do anything less than confess and take their punishment.

If Baylor is out then we could break the league at 7. I'm still worried about whoever is left behind though as I think there's a potential for politics to come into play.

Normally we would think about Kansas State being left out. They don't offer much, sure, but they share a state with someone who does so if you're a KS politician do you try to force KU's hand to go along with getting KSU in somewhere before they vote to dissolve the league. It's what I would do.

Iowa State and West Virginia are the only ones disconnected from a political anchor. It would be structurally easier to leave them out, but the networks probably want WVU in the fold. ISU, maybe...not sure.

ESPN may need FOX's help to make everything work. I wonder if the two networks will start making more joint bids in the future partly in an effort to stave off the internet companies that threaten to undermine the entire industry. They could share content as well as costs and mitigate to some degree any competitive bids made by the likes of Amazon.

What if FOX and ESPN agree to jointly bid on the SEC's 1st Tier rights when they come open? Together, they could push CBS out. ESPN could agree to cede more of the B1G rights to FOX, especially basketball which some analysts are saying will be decreased in coverage by ESPN anyway. ESPN has a glut of college basketball content that they can't properly monetize. At that, it seems they would rather focus on the NBA. FOX has very little to offer during that time of year by comparison.

Especially if the Big 12 is going away then FOX is going to lose some football content from that league. They'll make it up a little with B1G games, but they're still sharing those with ESPN. They're sharing the PAC as well.

So what if FOX not only loses the Big 12 content, but agrees to help make it happen?

Maybe this...

B1G takes Kansas and UConn

FOX needs more basketball content and this is a good way to make it happen. In addition, ceding more B1G rights to FOX helps them transition content better between their main networks and the BTN. FOX has something to gain here.

ACC takes Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Texas, TCU, Houston, and West Virginia

The ACC gains 2 huge brands in ND and UT, market access in UC, content value in WVU, and greater market penetration by accessing DFW and Houston.

SEC takes BYU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and Iowa State

The SEC gets OU obviously with content value in OSU. The TT addition helps nail down DFW and tap West TX whereas the league already has a solid presence in Houston. KSU is probably a better fit than KU and brings a better football brand. ISU is AAU and brings some additional basketball cache. BYU is ESPN's idea to finish it out because their games won't be worth much in the new P4 world if they're on the outside looking in. Geographically, they're square in a completely Western division.

The SEC and ACC essentially split TX down the middle so that everyone gets in, but no league dominates the market. ESPN and FOX can share 1st Tier rights to the SEC and with so many schools, ESPN doesn't really lose any games.

(05-13-2017 08:11 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:53 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 10:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I think we are approaching this the wrong way with regards to the SEC and ACC and who we should take.

The ACC needs Notre Dame plus 3 to get to 18, or 4 to get to 18 while N.D. keeps its special arrangement.

The SEC needs 4 to get to 18.

If Baylor is sanctioned and lose their vote, or worse get kicked out, the Big 12 would stand at 9. They would, by NCAA precedent, have two years to get back up to 10 before they lose rights given at the membership level of 10 (right now that is a potential CCG). Two years would be all they would need to set up moves.

So our question should be how should the SEC divide the 7 required schools so that dissolution would be possible without Baylor's vote or presence and if Baylor still has full membership should we look to take 8 and leave N.D. as a partial?

I'd say Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State, and Oklahoma State to the SEC.

Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech and West Virginia to the ACC at 4. Drop West Virginia at 3.

But this might make for a fun debate.

Dividing the Big 12 to allow the conference to be dissolved:

Here's your out-of-the-box solution.

ACC moves to 18 with Notre Dame, Missouri, Iowa State and Kansas

SEC moves to 18 with West Virginia, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas and Texas Tech

I'll take JR option. The ACC needs football brands (Texas) more than basketball brands (Kansas).

We really don't need anything. NCAA champs in football and basketball.

(05-13-2017 09:19 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 10:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 10:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 10:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I think we are approaching this the wrong way with regards to the SEC and ACC and who we should take.

The ACC needs Notre Dame plus 3 to get to 18, or 4 to get to 18 while N.D. keeps its special arrangement.

The SEC needs 4 to get to 18.

If Baylor is sanctioned and lose their vote, or worse get kicked out, the Big 12 would stand at 9. They would, by NCAA precedent, have two years to get back up to 10 before they lose rights given at the membership level of 10 (right now that is a potential CCG). Two years would be all they would need to set up moves.

So our question should be how should the SEC divide the 7 required schools so that dissolution would be possible without Baylor's vote or presence and if Baylor still has full membership should we look to take 8 and leave N.D. as a partial?

I'd say Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State, and Oklahoma State to the SEC.

Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech and West Virginia to the ACC at 4. Drop West Virginia at 3.

But this might make for a fun debate.

I think Baylor is still going to be in the mix though. The NCAA got burned in the sphere of public opinion when they went after Penn State. Many people felt they overstepped their bounds. In fact, the NCAA walked back a lot of the sanctions over time.

I'm not sure what authority the Feds have to bring the hammer down on Baylor. Perhaps they have more leeway to do something, not sure.

Anyway, I think the linchpin may have to be something else.

They are going to get hit for violations of Title IX and violations of the Clery Act by the Feds. The cover up goes clearly to the presidents office. The NCAA will have access to the Fed's investigations. If they follow up with severe sanctions I doubt Baylor will have much recourse in disputing the findings of a Federal Court. S.M.U. and Penn State didn't face that. S.M.U. because it was just corrupt athletic practices and Penn State because the State government made pursuing the case difficult. Baylor will have no such cover, and they have the righteous indignation of a boat load of Texas Baptist's to contend with if they do anything less than confess and take their punishment.

If Baylor is out then we could break the league at 7. I'm still worried about whoever is left behind though as I think there's a potential for politics to come into play.

Normally we would think about Kansas State being left out. They don't offer much, sure, but they share a state with someone who does so if you're a KS politician do you try to force KU's hand to go along with getting KSU in somewhere before they vote to dissolve the league. It's what I would do.

Iowa State and West Virginia are the only ones disconnected from a political anchor. It would be structurally easier to leave them out, but the networks probably want WVU in the fold. ISU, maybe...not sure.

ESPN may need FOX's help to make everything work. I wonder if the two networks will start making more joint bids in the future partly in an effort to stave off the internet companies that threaten to undermine the entire industry. They could share content as well as costs and mitigate to some degree any competitive bids made by the likes of Amazon.

What if FOX and ESPN agree to jointly bid on the SEC's 1st Tier rights when they come open? Together, they could push CBS out. ESPN could agree to cede more of the B1G rights to FOX, especially basketball which some analysts are saying will be decreased in coverage by ESPN anyway. ESPN has a glut of college basketball content that they can't properly monetize. At that, it seems they would rather focus on the NBA. FOX has very little to offer during that time of year by comparison.

Especially if the Big 12 is going away then FOX is going to lose some football content from that league. They'll make it up a little with B1G games, but they're still sharing those with ESPN. They're sharing the PAC as well.

So what if FOX not only loses the Big 12 content, but agrees to help make it happen?

Maybe this...

B1G takes Kansas and UConn

FOX needs more basketball content and this is a good way to make it happen. In addition, ceding more B1G rights to FOX helps them transition content better between their main networks and the BTN. FOX has something to gain here.

ACC takes Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Texas, TCU, Houston, and West Virginia

The ACC gains 2 huge brands in ND and UT, market access in UC, content value in WVU, and greater market penetration by accessing DFW and Houston.

SEC takes BYU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and Iowa State

The SEC gets OU obviously with content value in OSU. The TT addition helps nail down DFW and tap West TX whereas the league already has a solid presence in Houston. KSU is probably a better fit than KU and brings a better football brand. ISU is AAU and brings some additional basketball cache. BYU is ESPN's idea to finish it out because their games won't be worth much in the new P4 world if they're on the outside looking in. Geographically, they're square in a completely Western division.

The SEC and ACC essentially split TX down the middle so that everyone gets in, but no league dominates the market. ESPN and FOX can share 1st Tier rights to the SEC and with so many schools, ESPN doesn't really lose any games.

I think finances hold us at Occam's Razor. If 7 does it then it will be 7. If 8 does it then it will be 8. BTW I listened to a Louisville podcast with Tim Brando (although I'm not a big fan of Brando). He said he believed Notre Dame would join the ACC in full based on conversations he has had with various N.D. people (who he refused to name). So it will probably be 7.

There is a lot of loose information right now all of which is seemingly disconnected, but most of which points to the same thing, movement. Might we be getting much closer to both the parsing of the Big 12 and full Notre Dame inclusion? If so it means we are headed toward a P4 and that the two cable networks may be working some issues out, possibly, but not necessarily, in concert.

(05-13-2017 07:53 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 10:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I think we are approaching this the wrong way with regards to the SEC and ACC and who we should take.

The ACC needs Notre Dame plus 3 to get to 18, or 4 to get to 18 while N.D. keeps its special arrangement.

The SEC needs 4 to get to 18.

If Baylor is sanctioned and lose their vote, or worse get kicked out, the Big 12 would stand at 9. They would, by NCAA precedent, have two years to get back up to 10 before they lose rights given at the membership level of 10 (right now that is a potential CCG). Two years would be all they would need to set up moves.

So our question should be how should the SEC divide the 7 required schools so that dissolution would be possible without Baylor's vote or presence and if Baylor still has full membership should we look to take 8 and leave N.D. as a partial?

I'd say Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State, and Oklahoma State to the SEC.

Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech and West Virginia to the ACC at 4. Drop West Virginia at 3.

But this might make for a fun debate.

Dividing the Big 12 to allow the conference to be dissolved:

Here's your out-of-the-box solution.

ACC moves to 18 with Notre Dame, Missouri, Iowa State and Kansas

SEC moves to 18 with West Virginia, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas and Texas Tech

Okay X. Put the corn liquor down. Why in the hell would Missouri ever agree to this? The SEC is solid right now, and is not dependent on anyone. You cannot trade schools around like baseball cards.

(05-13-2017 10:23 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 08:11 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:53 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 10:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I think we are approaching this the wrong way with regards to the SEC and ACC and who we should take.

The ACC needs Notre Dame plus 3 to get to 18, or 4 to get to 18 while N.D. keeps its special arrangement.

The SEC needs 4 to get to 18.

If Baylor is sanctioned and lose their vote, or worse get kicked out, the Big 12 would stand at 9. They would, by NCAA precedent, have two years to get back up to 10 before they lose rights given at the membership level of 10 (right now that is a potential CCG). Two years would be all they would need to set up moves.

So our question should be how should the SEC divide the 7 required schools so that dissolution would be possible without Baylor's vote or presence and if Baylor still has full membership should we look to take 8 and leave N.D. as a partial?

I'd say Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State, and Oklahoma State to the SEC.

Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech and West Virginia to the ACC at 4. Drop West Virginia at 3.

But this might make for a fun debate.

Dividing the Big 12 to allow the conference to be dissolved:

Here's your out-of-the-box solution.

ACC moves to 18 with Notre Dame, Missouri, Iowa State and Kansas

SEC moves to 18 with West Virginia, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas and Texas Tech

I'll take JR option. The ACC needs football brands (Texas) more than basketball brands (Kansas).

We really don't need anything. NCAA champs in football and basketball.

Ah yes, Carolina officiating and the two red headed step children of the ACC: Clemson and Florida State. You still have the lowest P5 income, the fewest number of actual viewers versus potential viewers, and 8 of your hoops teams went down in flames in the NCAA tournament. But somehow I knew when Arkansas got jobbed at the 3 minute mark of the second half that UNC would enable an ultimate disaster which was the ACC's tourney performance to become a positive talking point.

Clemson and Florida State at least are not anomalies. They are the two step tribes of the SEC dwelling just across the Jordan.

(05-13-2017 10:26 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 09:19 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 10:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 10:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 10:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I think we are approaching this the wrong way with regards to the SEC and ACC and who we should take.

The ACC needs Notre Dame plus 3 to get to 18, or 4 to get to 18 while N.D. keeps its special arrangement.

The SEC needs 4 to get to 18.

If Baylor is sanctioned and lose their vote, or worse get kicked out, the Big 12 would stand at 9. They would, by NCAA precedent, have two years to get back up to 10 before they lose rights given at the membership level of 10 (right now that is a potential CCG). Two years would be all they would need to set up moves.

So our question should be how should the SEC divide the 7 required schools so that dissolution would be possible without Baylor's vote or presence and if Baylor still has full membership should we look to take 8 and leave N.D. as a partial?

I'd say Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State, and Oklahoma State to the SEC.

Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech and West Virginia to the ACC at 4. Drop West Virginia at 3.

But this might make for a fun debate.

I think Baylor is still going to be in the mix though. The NCAA got burned in the sphere of public opinion when they went after Penn State. Many people felt they overstepped their bounds. In fact, the NCAA walked back a lot of the sanctions over time.

I'm not sure what authority the Feds have to bring the hammer down on Baylor. Perhaps they have more leeway to do something, not sure.

Anyway, I think the linchpin may have to be something else.

They are going to get hit for violations of Title IX and violations of the Clery Act by the Feds. The cover up goes clearly to the presidents office. The NCAA will have access to the Fed's investigations. If they follow up with severe sanctions I doubt Baylor will have much recourse in disputing the findings of a Federal Court. S.M.U. and Penn State didn't face that. S.M.U. because it was just corrupt athletic practices and Penn State because the State government made pursuing the case difficult. Baylor will have no such cover, and they have the righteous indignation of a boat load of Texas Baptist's to contend with if they do anything less than confess and take their punishment.

If Baylor is out then we could break the league at 7. I'm still worried about whoever is left behind though as I think there's a potential for politics to come into play.

Normally we would think about Kansas State being left out. They don't offer much, sure, but they share a state with someone who does so if you're a KS politician do you try to force KU's hand to go along with getting KSU in somewhere before they vote to dissolve the league. It's what I would do.

Iowa State and West Virginia are the only ones disconnected from a political anchor. It would be structurally easier to leave them out, but the networks probably want WVU in the fold. ISU, maybe...not sure.

ESPN may need FOX's help to make everything work. I wonder if the two networks will start making more joint bids in the future partly in an effort to stave off the internet companies that threaten to undermine the entire industry. They could share content as well as costs and mitigate to some degree any competitive bids made by the likes of Amazon.

What if FOX and ESPN agree to jointly bid on the SEC's 1st Tier rights when they come open? Together, they could push CBS out. ESPN could agree to cede more of the B1G rights to FOX, especially basketball which some analysts are saying will be decreased in coverage by ESPN anyway. ESPN has a glut of college basketball content that they can't properly monetize. At that, it seems they would rather focus on the NBA. FOX has very little to offer during that time of year by comparison.

Especially if the Big 12 is going away then FOX is going to lose some football content from that league. They'll make it up a little with B1G games, but they're still sharing those with ESPN. They're sharing the PAC as well.

So what if FOX not only loses the Big 12 content, but agrees to help make it happen?

Maybe this...

B1G takes Kansas and UConn

FOX needs more basketball content and this is a good way to make it happen. In addition, ceding more B1G rights to FOX helps them transition content better between their main networks and the BTN. FOX has something to gain here.

ACC takes Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Texas, TCU, Houston, and West Virginia

The ACC gains 2 huge brands in ND and UT, market access in UC, content value in WVU, and greater market penetration by accessing DFW and Houston.

SEC takes BYU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and Iowa State

The SEC gets OU obviously with content value in OSU. The TT addition helps nail down DFW and tap West TX whereas the league already has a solid presence in Houston. KSU is probably a better fit than KU and brings a better football brand. ISU is AAU and brings some additional basketball cache. BYU is ESPN's idea to finish it out because their games won't be worth much in the new P4 world if they're on the outside looking in. Geographically, they're square in a completely Western division.

The SEC and ACC essentially split TX down the middle so that everyone gets in, but no league dominates the market. ESPN and FOX can share 1st Tier rights to the SEC and with so many schools, ESPN doesn't really lose any games.

I think finances hold us at Occam's Razor. If 7 does it then it will be 7. If 8 does it then it will be 8. BTW I listened to a Louisville podcast with Tim Brando (although I'm not a big fan of Brando). He said he believed Notre Dame would join the ACC in full based on conversations he has had with various N.D. people (who he refused to name). So it will probably be 7.

There is a lot of loose information right now all of which is seemingly disconnected, but most of which points to the same thing, movement. Might we be getting much closer to both the parsing of the Big 12 and full Notre Dame inclusion? If so it means we are headed toward a P4 and that the two cable networks may be working some issues out, possibly, but not necessarily, in concert.

Admittedly, that scenario is a little far fetched. I'm still wondering though whether if FOX and ESPN are going to partner to a greater degree.

(05-13-2017 12:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 10:23 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 08:11 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:53 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 10:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I think we are approaching this the wrong way with regards to the SEC and ACC and who we should take.

The ACC needs Notre Dame plus 3 to get to 18, or 4 to get to 18 while N.D. keeps its special arrangement.

The SEC needs 4 to get to 18.

If Baylor is sanctioned and lose their vote, or worse get kicked out, the Big 12 would stand at 9. They would, by NCAA precedent, have two years to get back up to 10 before they lose rights given at the membership level of 10 (right now that is a potential CCG). Two years would be all they would need to set up moves.

So our question should be how should the SEC divide the 7 required schools so that dissolution would be possible without Baylor's vote or presence and if Baylor still has full membership should we look to take 8 and leave N.D. as a partial?

I'd say Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State, and Oklahoma State to the SEC.

Texas, T.C.U., Texas Tech and West Virginia to the ACC at 4. Drop West Virginia at 3.

But this might make for a fun debate.

Dividing the Big 12 to allow the conference to be dissolved:

Here's your out-of-the-box solution.

ACC moves to 18 with Notre Dame, Missouri, Iowa State and Kansas

SEC moves to 18 with West Virginia, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas and Texas Tech

I'll take JR option. The ACC needs football brands (Texas) more than basketball brands (Kansas).

We really don't need anything. NCAA champs in football and basketball.

Ah yes, Carolina officiating and the two red headed step children of the ACC: Clemson and Florida State. You still have the lowest P5 income, the fewest number of actual viewers versus potential viewers, and 8 of your hoops teams went down in flames in the NCAA tournament. But somehow I knew when Arkansas got jobbed at the 3 minute mark of the second half that UNC would enable an ultimate disaster which was the ACC's tourney performance to become a positive talking point.

Clemson and Florida State at least are not anomalies. They are the two step tribes of the SEC dwelling just across the Jordan.

Give it a rest JR.....even Brando in his interview suggested that the ACC was the best football conference this year and getting better.

(05-13-2017 01:34 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 12:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 10:23 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 08:11 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:53 AM)XLance Wrote:  Dividing the Big 12 to allow the conference to be dissolved:

Here's your out-of-the-box solution.

ACC moves to 18 with Notre Dame, Missouri, Iowa State and Kansas

SEC moves to 18 with West Virginia, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas and Texas Tech

I'll take JR option. The ACC needs football brands (Texas) more than basketball brands (Kansas).

We really don't need anything. NCAA champs in football and basketball.

Ah yes, Carolina officiating and the two red headed step children of the ACC: Clemson and Florida State. You still have the lowest P5 income, the fewest number of actual viewers versus potential viewers, and 8 of your hoops teams went down in flames in the NCAA tournament. But somehow I knew when Arkansas got jobbed at the 3 minute mark of the second half that UNC would enable an ultimate disaster which was the ACC's tourney performance to become a positive talking point.

Clemson and Florida State at least are not anomalies. They are the two step tribes of the SEC dwelling just across the Jordan.

Give it a rest JR.....even Brando in his interview suggested that the ACC was the best football conference this year and getting better.

I agree with that.

Down year for the SEC with all the recent coaching changes trying to find a way to beat Saban.

(05-13-2017 01:28 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 10:26 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 09:19 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 10:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 10:27 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I think Baylor is still going to be in the mix though. The NCAA got burned in the sphere of public opinion when they went after Penn State. Many people felt they overstepped their bounds. In fact, the NCAA walked back a lot of the sanctions over time.

I'm not sure what authority the Feds have to bring the hammer down on Baylor. Perhaps they have more leeway to do something, not sure.

Anyway, I think the linchpin may have to be something else.

They are going to get hit for violations of Title IX and violations of the Clery Act by the Feds. The cover up goes clearly to the presidents office. The NCAA will have access to the Fed's investigations. If they follow up with severe sanctions I doubt Baylor will have much recourse in disputing the findings of a Federal Court. S.M.U. and Penn State didn't face that. S.M.U. because it was just corrupt athletic practices and Penn State because the State government made pursuing the case difficult. Baylor will have no such cover, and they have the righteous indignation of a boat load of Texas Baptist's to contend with if they do anything less than confess and take their punishment.

If Baylor is out then we could break the league at 7. I'm still worried about whoever is left behind though as I think there's a potential for politics to come into play.

Normally we would think about Kansas State being left out. They don't offer much, sure, but they share a state with someone who does so if you're a KS politician do you try to force KU's hand to go along with getting KSU in somewhere before they vote to dissolve the league. It's what I would do.

Iowa State and West Virginia are the only ones disconnected from a political anchor. It would be structurally easier to leave them out, but the networks probably want WVU in the fold. ISU, maybe...not sure.

ESPN may need FOX's help to make everything work. I wonder if the two networks will start making more joint bids in the future partly in an effort to stave off the internet companies that threaten to undermine the entire industry. They could share content as well as costs and mitigate to some degree any competitive bids made by the likes of Amazon.

What if FOX and ESPN agree to jointly bid on the SEC's 1st Tier rights when they come open? Together, they could push CBS out. ESPN could agree to cede more of the B1G rights to FOX, especially basketball which some analysts are saying will be decreased in coverage by ESPN anyway. ESPN has a glut of college basketball content that they can't properly monetize. At that, it seems they would rather focus on the NBA. FOX has very little to offer during that time of year by comparison.

Especially if the Big 12 is going away then FOX is going to lose some football content from that league. They'll make it up a little with B1G games, but they're still sharing those with ESPN. They're sharing the PAC as well.

So what if FOX not only loses the Big 12 content, but agrees to help make it happen?

Maybe this...

B1G takes Kansas and UConn

FOX needs more basketball content and this is a good way to make it happen. In addition, ceding more B1G rights to FOX helps them transition content better between their main networks and the BTN. FOX has something to gain here.

ACC takes Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Texas, TCU, Houston, and West Virginia

The ACC gains 2 huge brands in ND and UT, market access in UC, content value in WVU, and greater market penetration by accessing DFW and Houston.

SEC takes BYU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, and Iowa State

The SEC gets OU obviously with content value in OSU. The TT addition helps nail down DFW and tap West TX whereas the league already has a solid presence in Houston. KSU is probably a better fit than KU and brings a better football brand. ISU is AAU and brings some additional basketball cache. BYU is ESPN's idea to finish it out because their games won't be worth much in the new P4 world if they're on the outside looking in. Geographically, they're square in a completely Western division.

The SEC and ACC essentially split TX down the middle so that everyone gets in, but no league dominates the market. ESPN and FOX can share 1st Tier rights to the SEC and with so many schools, ESPN doesn't really lose any games.

I think finances hold us at Occam's Razor. If 7 does it then it will be 7. If 8 does it then it will be 8. BTW I listened to a Louisville podcast with Tim Brando (although I'm not a big fan of Brando). He said he believed Notre Dame would join the ACC in full based on conversations he has had with various N.D. people (who he refused to name). So it will probably be 7.

There is a lot of loose information right now all of which is seemingly disconnected, but most of which points to the same thing, movement. Might we be getting much closer to both the parsing of the Big 12 and full Notre Dame inclusion? If so it means we are headed toward a P4 and that the two cable networks may be working some issues out, possibly, but not necessarily, in concert.

Admittedly, that scenario is a little far fetched. I'm still wondering though whether if FOX and ESPN are going to partner to a greater degree.

His tune change when FOX picked up his paycheck. Agenda anyone?

(05-13-2017 01:50 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:34 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 12:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 10:23 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 08:11 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  I'll take JR option. The ACC needs football brands (Texas) more than basketball brands (Kansas).

We really don't need anything. NCAA champs in football and basketball.

Ah yes, Carolina officiating and the two red headed step children of the ACC: Clemson and Florida State. You still have the lowest P5 income, the fewest number of actual viewers versus potential viewers, and 8 of your hoops teams went down in flames in the NCAA tournament. But somehow I knew when Arkansas got jobbed at the 3 minute mark of the second half that UNC would enable an ultimate disaster which was the ACC's tourney performance to become a positive talking point.

Clemson and Florida State at least are not anomalies. They are the two step tribes of the SEC dwelling just across the Jordan.

Give it a rest JR.....even Brando in his interview suggested that the ACC was the best football conference this year and getting better.

I agree with that.

Down year for the SEC with all the recent coaching changes trying to find a way to beat Saban.

Clemson won a deserved nail biter with Alabama. The rest is a divisional problem. When Mullen left Florida for Miss State Urban developed heart burn because he is no offensive guy. The same thing happened when his OC at OSU went to Houston.

Years of Richt squeaking by at Georgia added to the issues. Then Spurrier's slow demise at South Carolina just put the cherry on the top. There's nothing weak about the SEC West. But toss in Pinkel's cancer and voila the Eastern Division is a steaming hot pile of garbage. The issue isn't beating Saban. The issue is having South Carolina, Georgia and Florida all down at once. Throw in a strong Louisville program to play Kentucky every year and the perception swings not on our strength but on our weakness. Florida will be on the upturn and hopefully Georgia as well. If the South Carolina offense is stout then the whole thing will swing back.

Now tell me truthfully how was the last three minutes of that UNC tourney game?

Perception is important in sports and will remain so as long as people and computers (which are programmed by people) have a say in who plays for titles. Therefore I will never step aside for a moment of spin based upon limited data points.

What I agree with you about is coaching. We have some really crappy hires right now and some of them are in the West. Arkansas, Ole Miss, Auburn, and quite possibly L.S.U. now have suspect hires. That I don't like. With the recruits we get everyone of those schools should be performing at a much higher level. Glorified High School spreads are a crap offense to be running and Arkansas's experiment with a Big 10 like rushing attack has failed, and not due to lack of athletes, but to a lack of production. The size of the D lines and the lateral speed dooms that approach.

Clemson and Florida State are really strong, but how durable they would be facing the gauntlet of the SEC West would be interesting to see. The SEC West loses multiple players to injury during the grueling divisional schedule. The village idiot Malzahn and his inability to have a practiced and reasonable back up QB doomed what was a fairly effective Auburn offense last year. Losing Pettway before the UGA game and having a very pedestrian White at QB with a damaged throwing arm was a killer for the whole ending of the season.

But my point is to say this, that is exactly why Auburn and Alabama need to move East at this time and why we need to add two to the West. The East is just too weak. Missouri, Vandy and Kentucky have provided way too weak of a schedule in the East while there is no true break in the schedule in the West.

How much better would the SEC bowl pairings have been these past 5 years if L.S.U. had been the runner up to Alabama instead of Florida or Missouri? We need to address this issues soon.

(05-13-2017 02:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:50 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:34 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 12:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 10:23 AM)XLance Wrote:  We really don't need anything. NCAA champs in football and basketball.

Ah yes, Carolina officiating and the two red headed step children of the ACC: Clemson and Florida State. You still have the lowest P5 income, the fewest number of actual viewers versus potential viewers, and 8 of your hoops teams went down in flames in the NCAA tournament. But somehow I knew when Arkansas got jobbed at the 3 minute mark of the second half that UNC would enable an ultimate disaster which was the ACC's tourney performance to become a positive talking point.

Clemson and Florida State at least are not anomalies. They are the two step tribes of the SEC dwelling just across the Jordan.

Give it a rest JR.....even Brando in his interview suggested that the ACC was the best football conference this year and getting better.

I agree with that.

Down year for the SEC with all the recent coaching changes trying to find a way to beat Saban.

Clemson won a deserved nail biter with Alabama. The rest is a divisional problem. When Mullen left Florida for Miss State Urban developed heart burn because he is no offensive guy. The same thing happened when his OC at OSU went to Houston.

Years of Richt squeaking by at Georgia added to the issues. Then Spurrier's slow demise at South Carolina just put the cherry on the top. There's nothing weak about the SEC West. But toss in Pinkel's cancer and voila the Eastern Division is a steaming hot pile of garbage. The issue isn't beating Saban. The issue is having South Carolina, Georgia and Florida all down at once. Throw in a strong Louisville program to play Kentucky every year and the perception swings not on our strength but on our weakness. Florida will be on the upturn and hopefully Georgia as well. If the South Carolina offense is stout then the whole thing will swing back.

Now tell me truthfully how was the last three minutes of that UNC tourney game?

Perception is important in sports and will remain so as long as people and computers (which are programmed by people) have a say in who plays for titles. Therefore I will never step aside for a moment of spin based upon limited data points.

What I agree with you about is coaching. We have some really crappy hires right now and some of them are in the West. Arkansas, Ole Miss, Auburn, and quite possibly L.S.U. now have suspect hires. That I don't like. With the recruits we get everyone of those schools should be performing at a much higher level. Glorified High School spreads are a crap offense to be running and Arkansas's experiment with a Big 10 like rushing attack has failed, and not due to lack of athletes, but to a lack of production. The size of the D lines and the lateral speed dooms that approach.

Clemson and Florida State are really strong, but how durable they would be facing the gauntlet of the SEC West would be interesting to see. The SEC West loses multiple players to injury during the grueling divisional schedule. The village idiot Malzahn and his inability to have a practiced and reasonable back up QB doomed what was a fairly effective Auburn offense last year. Losing Pettway before the UGA game and having a very pedestrian White at QB with a damaged throwing arm was a killer for the whole ending of the season.

But my point is to say this, that is exactly why Auburn and Alabama need to move East at this time and why we need to add two to the West. The East is just too weak. Missouri, Vandy and Kentucky have provided way too weak of a schedule in the East while there is no true break in the schedule in the West.

How much better would the SEC bowl pairings have been these past 5 years if L.S.U. had been the runner up to Alabama instead of Florida or Missouri? We need to address this issues soon.

Stuff happens JR. Circumstances change......don't worry the SEC will be back on top one day.

(05-13-2017 03:24 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 02:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:50 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:34 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 12:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Ah yes, Carolina officiating and the two red headed step children of the ACC: Clemson and Florida State. You still have the lowest P5 income, the fewest number of actual viewers versus potential viewers, and 8 of your hoops teams went down in flames in the NCAA tournament. But somehow I knew when Arkansas got jobbed at the 3 minute mark of the second half that UNC would enable an ultimate disaster which was the ACC's tourney performance to become a positive talking point.

Clemson and Florida State at least are not anomalies. They are the two step tribes of the SEC dwelling just across the Jordan.

Give it a rest JR.....even Brando in his interview suggested that the ACC was the best football conference this year and getting better.

I agree with that.

Down year for the SEC with all the recent coaching changes trying to find a way to beat Saban.

Clemson won a deserved nail biter with Alabama. The rest is a divisional problem. When Mullen left Florida for Miss State Urban developed heart burn because he is no offensive guy. The same thing happened when his OC at OSU went to Houston.

Years of Richt squeaking by at Georgia added to the issues. Then Spurrier's slow demise at South Carolina just put the cherry on the top. There's nothing weak about the SEC West. But toss in Pinkel's cancer and voila the Eastern Division is a steaming hot pile of garbage. The issue isn't beating Saban. The issue is having South Carolina, Georgia and Florida all down at once. Throw in a strong Louisville program to play Kentucky every year and the perception swings not on our strength but on our weakness. Florida will be on the upturn and hopefully Georgia as well. If the South Carolina offense is stout then the whole thing will swing back.

Now tell me truthfully how was the last three minutes of that UNC tourney game?

Perception is important in sports and will remain so as long as people and computers (which are programmed by people) have a say in who plays for titles. Therefore I will never step aside for a moment of spin based upon limited data points.

What I agree with you about is coaching. We have some really crappy hires right now and some of them are in the West. Arkansas, Ole Miss, Auburn, and quite possibly L.S.U. now have suspect hires. That I don't like. With the recruits we get everyone of those schools should be performing at a much higher level. Glorified High School spreads are a crap offense to be running and Arkansas's experiment with a Big 10 like rushing attack has failed, and not due to lack of athletes, but to a lack of production. The size of the D lines and the lateral speed dooms that approach.

Clemson and Florida State are really strong, but how durable they would be facing the gauntlet of the SEC West would be interesting to see. The SEC West loses multiple players to injury during the grueling divisional schedule. The village idiot Malzahn and his inability to have a practiced and reasonable back up QB doomed what was a fairly effective Auburn offense last year. Losing Pettway before the UGA game and having a very pedestrian White at QB with a damaged throwing arm was a killer for the whole ending of the season.

But my point is to say this, that is exactly why Auburn and Alabama need to move East at this time and why we need to add two to the West. The East is just too weak. Missouri, Vandy and Kentucky have provided way too weak of a schedule in the East while there is no true break in the schedule in the West.

How much better would the SEC bowl pairings have been these past 5 years if L.S.U. had been the runner up to Alabama instead of Florida or Missouri? We need to address this issues soon.

Stuff happens JR. Circumstances change......don't worry the SEC will be back on top one day.

I'm not worried about being back on top. I've just not been happy since '91. Adding Missouri to the East really pissed me off. It's screwed up things even more. When Pinkel was there it was added balance, but since he left it has totally imbalanced the divisions.

I miss the games I loved for 30 plus years before '91.

(05-13-2017 05:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 03:24 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 02:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:50 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:34 PM)XLance Wrote:  Give it a rest JR.....even Brando in his interview suggested that the ACC was the best football conference this year and getting better.

I agree with that.

Down year for the SEC with all the recent coaching changes trying to find a way to beat Saban.

Clemson won a deserved nail biter with Alabama. The rest is a divisional problem. When Mullen left Florida for Miss State Urban developed heart burn because he is no offensive guy. The same thing happened when his OC at OSU went to Houston.

Years of Richt squeaking by at Georgia added to the issues. Then Spurrier's slow demise at South Carolina just put the cherry on the top. There's nothing weak about the SEC West. But toss in Pinkel's cancer and voila the Eastern Division is a steaming hot pile of garbage. The issue isn't beating Saban. The issue is having South Carolina, Georgia and Florida all down at once. Throw in a strong Louisville program to play Kentucky every year and the perception swings not on our strength but on our weakness. Florida will be on the upturn and hopefully Georgia as well. If the South Carolina offense is stout then the whole thing will swing back.

Now tell me truthfully how was the last three minutes of that UNC tourney game?

Perception is important in sports and will remain so as long as people and computers (which are programmed by people) have a say in who plays for titles. Therefore I will never step aside for a moment of spin based upon limited data points.

What I agree with you about is coaching. We have some really crappy hires right now and some of them are in the West. Arkansas, Ole Miss, Auburn, and quite possibly L.S.U. now have suspect hires. That I don't like. With the recruits we get everyone of those schools should be performing at a much higher level. Glorified High School spreads are a crap offense to be running and Arkansas's experiment with a Big 10 like rushing attack has failed, and not due to lack of athletes, but to a lack of production. The size of the D lines and the lateral speed dooms that approach.

Clemson and Florida State are really strong, but how durable they would be facing the gauntlet of the SEC West would be interesting to see. The SEC West loses multiple players to injury during the grueling divisional schedule. The village idiot Malzahn and his inability to have a practiced and reasonable back up QB doomed what was a fairly effective Auburn offense last year. Losing Pettway before the UGA game and having a very pedestrian White at QB with a damaged throwing arm was a killer for the whole ending of the season.

But my point is to say this, that is exactly why Auburn and Alabama need to move East at this time and why we need to add two to the West. The East is just too weak. Missouri, Vandy and Kentucky have provided way too weak of a schedule in the East while there is no true break in the schedule in the West.

How much better would the SEC bowl pairings have been these past 5 years if L.S.U. had been the runner up to Alabama instead of Florida or Missouri? We need to address this issues soon.

Stuff happens JR. Circumstances change......don't worry the SEC will be back on top one day.

I'm not worried about being back on top. I've just not been happy since '91. Adding Missouri to the East really pissed me off. It's screwed up things even more. When Pinkel was there it was added balance, but since he left it has totally imbalanced the divisions.

I miss the games I loved for 30 plus years before '91.

That's a long time to be "less than happy".

(05-13-2017 09:21 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 05:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 03:24 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 02:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:50 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  I agree with that.

Down year for the SEC with all the recent coaching changes trying to find a way to beat Saban.

Clemson won a deserved nail biter with Alabama. The rest is a divisional problem. When Mullen left Florida for Miss State Urban developed heart burn because he is no offensive guy. The same thing happened when his OC at OSU went to Houston.

Years of Richt squeaking by at Georgia added to the issues. Then Spurrier's slow demise at South Carolina just put the cherry on the top. There's nothing weak about the SEC West. But toss in Pinkel's cancer and voila the Eastern Division is a steaming hot pile of garbage. The issue isn't beating Saban. The issue is having South Carolina, Georgia and Florida all down at once. Throw in a strong Louisville program to play Kentucky every year and the perception swings not on our strength but on our weakness. Florida will be on the upturn and hopefully Georgia as well. If the South Carolina offense is stout then the whole thing will swing back.

Now tell me truthfully how was the last three minutes of that UNC tourney game?

Perception is important in sports and will remain so as long as people and computers (which are programmed by people) have a say in who plays for titles. Therefore I will never step aside for a moment of spin based upon limited data points.

What I agree with you about is coaching. We have some really crappy hires right now and some of them are in the West. Arkansas, Ole Miss, Auburn, and quite possibly L.S.U. now have suspect hires. That I don't like. With the recruits we get everyone of those schools should be performing at a much higher level. Glorified High School spreads are a crap offense to be running and Arkansas's experiment with a Big 10 like rushing attack has failed, and not due to lack of athletes, but to a lack of production. The size of the D lines and the lateral speed dooms that approach.

Clemson and Florida State are really strong, but how durable they would be facing the gauntlet of the SEC West would be interesting to see. The SEC West loses multiple players to injury during the grueling divisional schedule. The village idiot Malzahn and his inability to have a practiced and reasonable back up QB doomed what was a fairly effective Auburn offense last year. Losing Pettway before the UGA game and having a very pedestrian White at QB with a damaged throwing arm was a killer for the whole ending of the season.

But my point is to say this, that is exactly why Auburn and Alabama need to move East at this time and why we need to add two to the West. The East is just too weak. Missouri, Vandy and Kentucky have provided way too weak of a schedule in the East while there is no true break in the schedule in the West.

How much better would the SEC bowl pairings have been these past 5 years if L.S.U. had been the runner up to Alabama instead of Florida or Missouri? We need to address this issues soon.

Stuff happens JR. Circumstances change......don't worry the SEC will be back on top one day.

I'm not worried about being back on top. I've just not been happy since '91. Adding Missouri to the East really pissed me off. It's screwed up things even more. When Pinkel was there it was added balance, but since he left it has totally imbalanced the divisions.

I miss the games I loved for 30 plus years before '91.

That's a long time to be "less than happy".

Well hope springs eternally that we get this over with and eventually get the arrangement back in order.

(05-13-2017 02:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:50 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:34 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 12:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 10:23 AM)XLance Wrote:  We really don't need anything. NCAA champs in football and basketball.

Ah yes, Carolina officiating and the two red headed step children of the ACC: Clemson and Florida State. You still have the lowest P5 income, the fewest number of actual viewers versus potential viewers, and 8 of your hoops teams went down in flames in the NCAA tournament. But somehow I knew when Arkansas got jobbed at the 3 minute mark of the second half that UNC would enable an ultimate disaster which was the ACC's tourney performance to become a positive talking point.

Clemson and Florida State at least are not anomalies. They are the two step tribes of the SEC dwelling just across the Jordan.

Give it a rest JR.....even Brando in his interview suggested that the ACC was the best football conference this year and getting better.

I agree with that.

Down year for the SEC with all the recent coaching changes trying to find a way to beat Saban.

Clemson won a deserved nail biter with Alabama. The rest is a divisional problem. When Mullen left Florida for Miss State Urban developed heart burn because he is no offensive guy. The same thing happened when his OC at OSU went to Houston.

Years of Richt squeaking by at Georgia added to the issues. Then Spurrier's slow demise at South Carolina just put the cherry on the top. There's nothing weak about the SEC West. But toss in Pinkel's cancer and voila the Eastern Division is a steaming hot pile of garbage. The issue isn't beating Saban. The issue is having South Carolina, Georgia and Florida all down at once. Throw in a strong Louisville program to play Kentucky every year and the perception swings not on our strength but on our weakness. Florida will be on the upturn and hopefully Georgia as well. If the South Carolina offense is stout then the whole thing will swing back.

Now tell me truthfully how was the last three minutes of that UNC tourney game?

Perception is important in sports and will remain so as long as people and computers (which are programmed by people) have a say in who plays for titles. Therefore I will never step aside for a moment of spin based upon limited data points.

What I agree with you about is coaching. We have some really crappy hires right now and some of them are in the West. Arkansas, Ole Miss, Auburn, and quite possibly L.S.U. now have suspect hires. That I don't like. With the recruits we get everyone of those schools should be performing at a much higher level. Glorified High School spreads are a crap offense to be running and Arkansas's experiment with a Big 10 like rushing attack has failed, and not due to lack of athletes, but to a lack of production. The size of the D lines and the lateral speed dooms that approach.

Clemson and Florida State are really strong, but how durable they would be facing the gauntlet of the SEC West would be interesting to see. The SEC West loses multiple players to injury during the grueling divisional schedule. The village idiot Malzahn and his inability to have a practiced and reasonable back up QB doomed what was a fairly effective Auburn offense last year. Losing Pettway before the UGA game and having a very pedestrian White at QB with a damaged throwing arm was a killer for the whole ending of the season.

But my point is to say this, that is exactly why Auburn and Alabama need to move East at this time and why we need to add two to the West. The East is just too weak. Missouri, Vandy and Kentucky have provided way too weak of a schedule in the East while there is no true break in the schedule in the West.

How much better would the SEC bowl pairings have been these past 5 years if L.S.U. had been the runner up to Alabama instead of Florida or Missouri? We need to address this issues soon.

Well to add to this, Missouri also won two consecutive division titles, due to the fact the other east teams were down. We have been sharing the misery in the east. lol

(05-13-2017 11:15 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 02:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:50 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:34 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 12:04 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Ah yes, Carolina officiating and the two red headed step children of the ACC: Clemson and Florida State. You still have the lowest P5 income, the fewest number of actual viewers versus potential viewers, and 8 of your hoops teams went down in flames in the NCAA tournament. But somehow I knew when Arkansas got jobbed at the 3 minute mark of the second half that UNC would enable an ultimate disaster which was the ACC's tourney performance to become a positive talking point.

Clemson and Florida State at least are not anomalies. They are the two step tribes of the SEC dwelling just across the Jordan.

Give it a rest JR.....even Brando in his interview suggested that the ACC was the best football conference this year and getting better.

I agree with that.

Down year for the SEC with all the recent coaching changes trying to find a way to beat Saban.

Clemson won a deserved nail biter with Alabama. The rest is a divisional problem. When Mullen left Florida for Miss State Urban developed heart burn because he is no offensive guy. The same thing happened when his OC at OSU went to Houston.

Years of Richt squeaking by at Georgia added to the issues. Then Spurrier's slow demise at South Carolina just put the cherry on the top. There's nothing weak about the SEC West. But toss in Pinkel's cancer and voila the Eastern Division is a steaming hot pile of garbage. The issue isn't beating Saban. The issue is having South Carolina, Georgia and Florida all down at once. Throw in a strong Louisville program to play Kentucky every year and the perception swings not on our strength but on our weakness. Florida will be on the upturn and hopefully Georgia as well. If the South Carolina offense is stout then the whole thing will swing back.

Now tell me truthfully how was the last three minutes of that UNC tourney game?

Perception is important in sports and will remain so as long as people and computers (which are programmed by people) have a say in who plays for titles. Therefore I will never step aside for a moment of spin based upon limited data points.

What I agree with you about is coaching. We have some really crappy hires right now and some of them are in the West. Arkansas, Ole Miss, Auburn, and quite possibly L.S.U. now have suspect hires. That I don't like. With the recruits we get everyone of those schools should be performing at a much higher level. Glorified High School spreads are a crap offense to be running and Arkansas's experiment with a Big 10 like rushing attack has failed, and not due to lack of athletes, but to a lack of production. The size of the D lines and the lateral speed dooms that approach.

Clemson and Florida State are really strong, but how durable they would be facing the gauntlet of the SEC West would be interesting to see. The SEC West loses multiple players to injury during the grueling divisional schedule. The village idiot Malzahn and his inability to have a practiced and reasonable back up QB doomed what was a fairly effective Auburn offense last year. Losing Pettway before the UGA game and having a very pedestrian White at QB with a damaged throwing arm was a killer for the whole ending of the season.

But my point is to say this, that is exactly why Auburn and Alabama need to move East at this time and why we need to add two to the West. The East is just too weak. Missouri, Vandy and Kentucky have provided way too weak of a schedule in the East while there is no true break in the schedule in the West.

How much better would the SEC bowl pairings have been these past 5 years if L.S.U. had been the runner up to Alabama instead of Florida or Missouri? We need to address this issues soon.

Well to add to this, Missouri also won two consecutive division titles, due to the fact the other east teams were down. We have been sharing the misery in the east. lol

You guys couldn't help losing Pinkel. How's he doing?

(05-13-2017 05:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 03:24 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 02:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:50 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:34 PM)XLance Wrote:  Give it a rest JR.....even Brando in his interview suggested that the ACC was the best football conference this year and getting better.

I agree with that.

Down year for the SEC with all the recent coaching changes trying to find a way to beat Saban.

Clemson won a deserved nail biter with Alabama. The rest is a divisional problem. When Mullen left Florida for Miss State Urban developed heart burn because he is no offensive guy. The same thing happened when his OC at OSU went to Houston.

Years of Richt squeaking by at Georgia added to the issues. Then Spurrier's slow demise at South Carolina just put the cherry on the top. There's nothing weak about the SEC West. But toss in Pinkel's cancer and voila the Eastern Division is a steaming hot pile of garbage. The issue isn't beating Saban. The issue is having South Carolina, Georgia and Florida all down at once. Throw in a strong Louisville program to play Kentucky every year and the perception swings not on our strength but on our weakness. Florida will be on the upturn and hopefully Georgia as well. If the South Carolina offense is stout then the whole thing will swing back.

Now tell me truthfully how was the last three minutes of that UNC tourney game?

Perception is important in sports and will remain so as long as people and computers (which are programmed by people) have a say in who plays for titles. Therefore I will never step aside for a moment of spin based upon limited data points.

What I agree with you about is coaching. We have some really crappy hires right now and some of them are in the West. Arkansas, Ole Miss, Auburn, and quite possibly L.S.U. now have suspect hires. That I don't like. With the recruits we get everyone of those schools should be performing at a much higher level. Glorified High School spreads are a crap offense to be running and Arkansas's experiment with a Big 10 like rushing attack has failed, and not due to lack of athletes, but to a lack of production. The size of the D lines and the lateral speed dooms that approach.

Clemson and Florida State are really strong, but how durable they would be facing the gauntlet of the SEC West would be interesting to see. The SEC West loses multiple players to injury during the grueling divisional schedule. The village idiot Malzahn and his inability to have a practiced and reasonable back up QB doomed what was a fairly effective Auburn offense last year. Losing Pettway before the UGA game and having a very pedestrian White at QB with a damaged throwing arm was a killer for the whole ending of the season.

But my point is to say this, that is exactly why Auburn and Alabama need to move East at this time and why we need to add two to the West. The East is just too weak. Missouri, Vandy and Kentucky have provided way too weak of a schedule in the East while there is no true break in the schedule in the West.

How much better would the SEC bowl pairings have been these past 5 years if L.S.U. had been the runner up to Alabama instead of Florida or Missouri? We need to address this issues soon.

Stuff happens JR. Circumstances change......don't worry the SEC will be back on top one day.

I'm not worried about being back on top. I've just not been happy since '91. Adding Missouri to the East really pissed me off. It's screwed up things even more. When Pinkel was there it was added balance, but since he left it has totally imbalanced the divisions.

I miss the games I loved for 30 plus years before '91.

Wasn't Missouri forced into the East by Alabama, Jr?

(05-13-2017 11:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 11:15 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 02:49 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:50 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 01:34 PM)XLance Wrote:  Give it a rest JR.....even Brando in his interview suggested that the ACC was the best football conference this year and getting better.

I agree with that.

Down year for the SEC with all the recent coaching changes trying to find a way to beat Saban.

Clemson won a deserved nail biter with Alabama. The rest is a divisional problem. When Mullen left Florida for Miss State Urban developed heart burn because he is no offensive guy. The same thing happened when his OC at OSU went to Houston.

Years of Richt squeaking by at Georgia added to the issues. Then Spurrier's slow demise at South Carolina just put the cherry on the top. There's nothing weak about the SEC West. But toss in Pinkel's cancer and voila the Eastern Division is a steaming hot pile of garbage. The issue isn't beating Saban. The issue is having South Carolina, Georgia and Florida all down at once. Throw in a strong Louisville program to play Kentucky every year and the perception swings not on our strength but on our weakness. Florida will be on the upturn and hopefully Georgia as well. If the South Carolina offense is stout then the whole thing will swing back.

Now tell me truthfully how was the last three minutes of that UNC tourney game?

Perception is important in sports and will remain so as long as people and computers (which are programmed by people) have a say in who plays for titles. Therefore I will never step aside for a moment of spin based upon limited data points.

What I agree with you about is coaching. We have some really crappy hires right now and some of them are in the West. Arkansas, Ole Miss, Auburn, and quite possibly L.S.U. now have suspect hires. That I don't like. With the recruits we get everyone of those schools should be performing at a much higher level. Glorified High School spreads are a crap offense to be running and Arkansas's experiment with a Big 10 like rushing attack has failed, and not due to lack of athletes, but to a lack of production. The size of the D lines and the lateral speed dooms that approach.

Clemson and Florida State are really strong, but how durable they would be facing the gauntlet of the SEC West would be interesting to see. The SEC West loses multiple players to injury during the grueling divisional schedule. The village idiot Malzahn and his inability to have a practiced and reasonable back up QB doomed what was a fairly effective Auburn offense last year. Losing Pettway before the UGA game and having a very pedestrian White at QB with a damaged throwing arm was a killer for the whole ending of the season.

But my point is to say this, that is exactly why Auburn and Alabama need to move East at this time and why we need to add two to the West. The East is just too weak. Missouri, Vandy and Kentucky have provided way too weak of a schedule in the East while there is no true break in the schedule in the West.

How much better would the SEC bowl pairings have been these past 5 years if L.S.U. had been the runner up to Alabama instead of Florida or Missouri? We need to address this issues soon.

Well to add to this, Missouri also won two consecutive division titles, due to the fact the other east teams were down. We have been sharing the misery in the east. lol

You guys couldn't help losing Pinkel. How's he doing?

He is in remission now and feeling fine. I heard he was working around the campus, but not sure.