+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: SECbbs (/forum-285.html)
+---- Forum: SEC Conference Talk (/forum-246.html)
+---- Thread: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? (/thread-639096.html)
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - jhawkmvp - 06-05-2014 12:52 AM
(06-04-2014 06:39 PM)XLance Wrote:(06-04-2014 04:54 PM)JRsec Wrote:(06-03-2014 09:07 PM)XLance Wrote: Jorts......Maybe it's just a thing in the state of Florida.How or why were your eyes drawn to that pair of shorts when there are four lovely smiles and 4 nice racks in the picture?
Because the Florida State photo looked a lot better than the Florida one.
Those Jorts must be an epidemic in Florida.
I'll gladly take jorts, if it means girls in daisy dukes.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 06-05-2014 12:14 PM
(06-05-2014 12:44 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:(06-04-2014 04:04 PM)XLance Wrote: jhawkmvp,
As a Kansas fan, where would you like to end up assuming that the Big 12 does die?
I don't think that Texas, Oklahoma or Kansas will have trouble finding a soft spot to land if it becomes necessary.
Honestly, it would depend on where Texas and OU end up. I really love being partners with them in the B12. I think they would all like to stay together, but have little brothers to take care of that might not make that possible (more OU and UT than KU because Kansas is too small and the KSU brand too weak to piggyback to another conference with KU). The PAC, SEC, and B1G all have former Big 8/12 schools that we have strong ties too. Our greatest rival, Missouri, is in the SEC now and unless we end up in the same conference with them down the road that is a dead rivalry unless things change dramatically (primarily due to it being in our best interest to keep their exposure in Kansas City to a minimum IMO).
I can talk pretty openly about all the conferences because I could see KU in all of them depending on how things play out and they all have some good to great points. I think KU is in a second tier of schools that would be a valued asset to any conference, but will have to wait on schools like Texas, UVA, OU, and UNC, that have better markets and/or FB helmet programs, to pass on or accept invites to certain conferences to get our landing spot, most likely. Which schools end up where could change things dramatically financially and competitively in sports, so a conference that is behind now, could vault to the top, or close to the top, with the right schools/markets/brands.
My quick thoughts off the top of my head on the conferences from my perspective as a KU fan (Phog and other KU fans might add to these):
ACC
Pros: Huge footprint. Academically strong. Lot of KU/UNC ties. Basketball season would be insanely entertaining. KU/UNC, KU/Duke, KU/Syracuse, KU/Louisville, etc. That would be basketball nirvana. Football would be easier and less competitive than the B12 so KU would see better results on the gridiron I think. GA/FL FB recruiting opens up. If it happens, most likely the ACC added at least Texas, and more likely, 4 or more other B12 schools.
Cons:Swofford currently runs it. I worry about fit there as some ACC fans can be extremely condescending to schools and fan bases from rural states. Maybe that is just an internet thing. Maybe not. Travel would be a hassle due to distance.
B1G
Pros: Best fit culturally and academically. Academically stellar. Almost exclusively AAU, with the CIC bonus. NU is already there. Financially it is the most powerful conference and will probably remain there for the foreseeable future. Basketball would be great. Match ups with Indiana, MSU, Michigan and others would be great. KU BB recruiting would get great exposure in NY, Chicago, D.C. and other hoops hotbeds. If the B1G goes past 16, then there is a good shot OU and Texas are there as well. Football should be competitive and improve as the current B1G is not as strong in FB as the B12 and IMO is the weakest currently. Shortest travel of the four.
Cons: Football recruiting in Texas would dry to a trickle (though to be honest KU did well under Mason in the 90s recruiting a lot of B1G states) unless UT and OU come as well. Worst FB recruiting grounds of the major conferences (which is showing on the field lately). Colder weather than the B12.
PAC
Pros:Better academically than the B12 by quite a bit. Warmer weather for fall and spring sports. California recruiting for everything. CU is there. KU basketball would probably have the best chance to have the same success as it has in the B12, while still getting UCLA and Arizona on the schedule each year. Would probably be 4-8 other B12 schools as well.
Cons:Worst time zone for games (PST). Travel would be a major hassle due to distance and time zone issues. Fans can be apathetic. Least exposure of all the conferences again related to time zone.
SEC
Pros:Best overall sports conference going IMO. Basketball would square off mostly with Kentucky, and sometimes Florida, for supremacy. KU BB should win similarly to the B12. Gains SE football recruiting to go with Texas. Missouri our greatest rival is there and the rivalry would be reignited. Texas A&M is there and we have some history from the B12 with them. Warm weather for spring and fall sports. Rabid fans. Probably means the SEC is going big and there would be additional B12 schools added as well. Football schedule would see some big name programs every year in Lawrence.
Cons:Not a step up academically from the B12, unless Texas or other AAU type schools are added as well. KU football would eternally struggle to be competitive, most likely, even if they were better just because of all the great schools at the top. Perceived cutthroat recruiting/eligibility issues (real or not).
If conferences only went to 16, and I had a gun against my head, I would probably pick the B1G primarily due to fit/travel and KU FB being more competitive there. But, I would be fine with any of them if the B12 falls apart and all have there good points.
I agree mostly with all of your pros and cons but offer 1 point of view difference about the cons listed for the ACC. I find that their condescension (snootiness) stems from proximity to and involvement with the beltway. The D.C. beltway is the single most arrogant, disconnected, and self absorbed grouping of people I've ever run across and mind you I once did extensive business with the Sea Island, Georgia crowd (most of whom were comfortable enough with wealth and position that they were never condescending to me or anyone else I observed them with. It tends to be a symptom of not only being nouveau riche, but particularly politically entitled, or of the corporate elite. With the research triangle you have many corporate elite types and in Virginia you have the beltway crowd and influence. Outside of Raleigh Durham most of North Carolina is extremely hospitable and the parts of Virginia away from the beltway tend to be as well although there is more of a Northern feel to the hospitality.
Outside of those two areas most of the rest of the ACC both North and South are fine. On the message boards what you are getting are the usual Klingons who aggrandize themselves with the adopted snobbery of their tangential association with the others. The reason it always pisses me off is because the biggest issue with our country right now is the sense of entitlement that the politicians have and the tight control that the corporate elite have over them. We are witnessing such control within the two political parties that now only the children of the trusted lackeys of corporate influence are allowed to hold nominations to replace their parents in office. It is beginning to look more like the House of Lords and should be anathema to Americans. We are a nation of 300 million and can only find a handful of families from which to elect new leadership??? It wasn't nearly this corrupt when I was young, although corruption has always been a factor. The American voter simply would have voted the other way no matter how much PAC money was spent. Now the American voter doesn't read, doesn't get involved, and only votes name recognition and that is how the entitled control the elections. It is also why we have the "cult" of celebrity in our nation. Run two candidates that both do their bidding, one each under the banners of the two party system, make sure the elections are so expensive that the independents either can't afford the structure at the grass roots level to run, or can't spend enough to get recognized by the public, and your candidate will win every time. A former governor here told me that there was no such thing as democrats and republicans that really those titles were the names of the two horses in a two horse race where both horses were owned by the same stable.
Anyway, what you are picking up on is the kind of arrogance that comes from those who are raised counting upon the entitlement of privilege and it is not common outside of a few regions of our country and doesn't reflect the attitude of most ACC fans outside of those at Pitt, UNC, Duke, UVA, and a few from Syracuse and BC who have beltway or corporate connections and with all of them those who spew it are in the minority. I base this on my past travels and knowledge of the folks in those areas. Most Americans are still fairly level headed decent people. But we have allowed those who do the bidding of their corporate masters to rig the election system to perpetuate themselves and it is damaging our democracy.
RE:If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - BewareThePhog - 06-05-2014 01:34 PM
(06-05-2014 12:44 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:I largely agree with this post. I was about to make what I thought was a new point until I realized that I'd skimmed too quickly over the opening paragraph, which is the tenuous nature of the Missouri rivalry. I agree that unless we find ourselves in the same conference, or KU and KSU land together and therefore remain conference rivals, there's little to no chance for this series to be resumed. Present circumstances and attitudes aside, if we're out of conference to both MU and KSU, I have no doubt that we'd expend our effort (either voluntarily or via legislative fiat) maintaining the ties to Kansas State, particularly in football where there are so few out-of-conference games possible.(06-04-2014 04:04 PM)XLance Wrote: jhawkmvp,
As a Kansas fan, where would you like to end up assuming that the Big 12 does die?
I don't think that Texas, Oklahoma or Kansas will have trouble finding a soft spot to land if it becomes necessary.
Honestly, it would depend on where Texas and OU end up. I really love being partners with them in the B12. I think they would all like to stay together, but have little brothers to take care of that might not make that possible (more OU and UT than KU because Kansas is too small and the KSU brand too weak to piggyback to another conference with KU). The PAC, SEC, and B1G all have former Big 8/12 schools that we have strong ties too. Our greatest rival, Missouri, is in the SEC now and unless we end up in the same conference with them down the road that is a dead rivalry unless things change dramatically (primarily due to it being in our best interest to keep their exposure in Kansas City to a minimum IMO).
I can talk pretty openly about all the conferences because I could see KU in all of them depending on how things play out and they all have some good to great points. I think KU is in a second tier of schools that would be a valued asset to any conference, but will have to wait on schools like Texas, UVA, OU, and UNC, that have better markets and/or FB helmet programs, to pass on or accept invites to certain conferences to get our landing spot, most likely. Which schools end up where could change things dramatically financially and competitively in sports, so a conference that is behind now, could vault to the top, or close to the top, with the right schools/markets/brands.
My quick thoughts off the top of my head on the conferences from my perspective as a KU fan (Phog and other KU fans might add to these):
ACC
Pros: Huge footprint. Academically strong. Lot of KU/UNC ties. Basketball season would be insanely entertaining. KU/UNC, KU/Duke, KU/Syracuse, KU/Louisville, etc. That would be basketball nirvana. Football would be easier and less competitive than the B12 so KU would see better results on the gridiron I think. GA/FL FB recruiting opens up. If it happens, most likely the ACC added at least Texas, and more likely, 4 or more other B12 schools.
Cons:Swofford currently runs it. I worry about fit there as some ACC fans can be extremely condescending to schools and fan bases from rural states. Maybe that is just an internet thing. Maybe not. Travel would be a hassle due to distance.
B1G
Pros: Best fit culturally and academically. Academically stellar. Almost exclusively AAU, with the CIC bonus. NU is already there. Financially it is the most powerful conference and will probably remain there for the foreseeable future. Basketball would be great. Match ups with Indiana, MSU, Michigan and others would be great. KU BB recruiting would get great exposure in NY, Chicago, D.C. and other hoops hotbeds. If the B1G goes past 16, then there is a good shot OU and Texas are there as well. Football should be competitive and improve as the current B1G is not as strong in FB as the B12 and IMO is the weakest currently. Shortest travel of the four.
Cons: Football recruiting in Texas would dry to a trickle (though to be honest KU did well under Mason in the 90s recruiting a lot of B1G states) unless UT and OU come as well. Worst FB recruiting grounds of the major conferences (which is showing on the field lately). Colder weather than the B12.
PAC
Pros:Better academically than the B12 by quite a bit. Warmer weather for fall and spring sports. California recruiting for everything. CU is there. KU basketball would probably have the best chance to have the same success as it has in the B12, while still getting UCLA and Arizona on the schedule each year. Would probably be 4-8 other B12 schools as well.
Cons:Worst time zone for games (PST). Travel would be a major hassle due to distance and time zone issues. Fans can be apathetic. Least exposure of all the conferences again related to time zone.
SEC
Pros:Best overall sports conference going IMO. Basketball would square off mostly with Kentucky, and sometimes Florida, for supremacy. KU BB should win similarly to the B12. Gains SE football recruiting to go with Texas. Missouri our greatest rival is there and the rivalry would be reignited. Texas A&M is there and we have some history from the B12 with them. Warm weather for spring and fall sports. Rabid fans. Probably means the SEC is going big and there would be additional B12 schools added as well. Football schedule would see some big name programs every year in Lawrence.
Cons:Not a step up academically from the B12, unless Texas or other AAU type schools are added as well. KU football would eternally struggle to be competitive, most likely, even if they were better just because of all the great schools at the top. Perceived cutthroat recruiting/eligibility issues (real or not).
If conferences only went to 16, and I had a gun against my head, I would probably pick the B1G primarily due to fit/travel and KU FB being more competitive there. But, I would be fine with any of them if the B12 falls apart and all have there good points.
In any scenario, KU's value to a new conference would be maximized by being partnered with a strong football school. So adding us to the B1G or SEC with OU, or to the ACC with UT would make us much more attractive to the new home. Both the ACC and B1G would lead to fantastic schedules in basketball, and we'd add to the SEC or PAC in that area.
As for choosing my overall preference, the B1G would be first - as noted, it's the best cultural, geographic, and academic fit. My 2nd choice would likely be the ACC, largely due to the great basketball matchups that would ensue, although with either that or the PAC we'd probably want to have several neighbors join with us to give us some grounding in the Midwest. The SEC is in many ways a poor cultural fit (more so for KU than it would be for KSU), and we'd be at the far NW corner of the conference geographically, but at least we would be direct neighbors to at least one if not two member states. I share jhawkmvp's reticence about the PAC due to the time zone issue.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - USAFMEDIC - 06-06-2014 11:33 AM
(06-05-2014 01:34 PM)BewareThePhog Wrote:I think you are pretty much spot on here. I would add this... if Kansas ever joins the SEC, they will certainly be a positive addition academically. Instead of joining a conference with a bunch of over-achieving academic schools, Kansas can help build something new in the SEC, together with A&M and Missouri. Sooner or later, the other SEC schools will feel the push for improvement.(06-05-2014 12:44 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:I largely agree with this post. I was about to make what I thought was a new point until I realized that I'd skimmed too quickly over the opening paragraph, which is the tenuous nature of the Missouri rivalry. I agree that unless we find ourselves in the same conference, or KU and KSU land together and therefore remain conference rivals, there's little to no chance for this series to be resumed. Present circumstances and attitudes aside, if we're out of conference to both MU and KSU, I have no doubt that we'd expend our effort (either voluntarily or via legislative fiat) maintaining the ties to Kansas State, particularly in football where there are so few out-of-conference games possible.(06-04-2014 04:04 PM)XLance Wrote: jhawkmvp,
As a Kansas fan, where would you like to end up assuming that the Big 12 does die?
I don't think that Texas, Oklahoma or Kansas will have trouble finding a soft spot to land if it becomes necessary.
Honestly, it would depend on where Texas and OU end up. I really love being partners with them in the B12. I think they would all like to stay together, but have little brothers to take care of that might not make that possible (more OU and UT than KU because Kansas is too small and the KSU brand too weak to piggyback to another conference with KU). The PAC, SEC, and B1G all have former Big 8/12 schools that we have strong ties too. Our greatest rival, Missouri, is in the SEC now and unless we end up in the same conference with them down the road that is a dead rivalry unless things change dramatically (primarily due to it being in our best interest to keep their exposure in Kansas City to a minimum IMO).
I can talk pretty openly about all the conferences because I could see KU in all of them depending on how things play out and they all have some good to great points. I think KU is in a second tier of schools that would be a valued asset to any conference, but will have to wait on schools like Texas, UVA, OU, and UNC, that have better markets and/or FB helmet programs, to pass on or accept invites to certain conferences to get our landing spot, most likely. Which schools end up where could change things dramatically financially and competitively in sports, so a conference that is behind now, could vault to the top, or close to the top, with the right schools/markets/brands.
My quick thoughts off the top of my head on the conferences from my perspective as a KU fan (Phog and other KU fans might add to these):
ACC
Pros: Huge footprint. Academically strong. Lot of KU/UNC ties. Basketball season would be insanely entertaining. KU/UNC, KU/Duke, KU/Syracuse, KU/Louisville, etc. That would be basketball nirvana. Football would be easier and less competitive than the B12 so KU would see better results on the gridiron I think. GA/FL FB recruiting opens up. If it happens, most likely the ACC added at least Texas, and more likely, 4 or more other B12 schools.
Cons:Swofford currently runs it. I worry about fit there as some ACC fans can be extremely condescending to schools and fan bases from rural states. Maybe that is just an internet thing. Maybe not. Travel would be a hassle due to distance.
B1G
Pros: Best fit culturally and academically. Academically stellar. Almost exclusively AAU, with the CIC bonus. NU is already there. Financially it is the most powerful conference and will probably remain there for the foreseeable future. Basketball would be great. Match ups with Indiana, MSU, Michigan and others would be great. KU BB recruiting would get great exposure in NY, Chicago, D.C. and other hoops hotbeds. If the B1G goes past 16, then there is a good shot OU and Texas are there as well. Football should be competitive and improve as the current B1G is not as strong in FB as the B12 and IMO is the weakest currently. Shortest travel of the four.
Cons: Football recruiting in Texas would dry to a trickle (though to be honest KU did well under Mason in the 90s recruiting a lot of B1G states) unless UT and OU come as well. Worst FB recruiting grounds of the major conferences (which is showing on the field lately). Colder weather than the B12.
PAC
Pros:Better academically than the B12 by quite a bit. Warmer weather for fall and spring sports. California recruiting for everything. CU is there. KU basketball would probably have the best chance to have the same success as it has in the B12, while still getting UCLA and Arizona on the schedule each year. Would probably be 4-8 other B12 schools as well.
Cons:Worst time zone for games (PST). Travel would be a major hassle due to distance and time zone issues. Fans can be apathetic. Least exposure of all the conferences again related to time zone.
SEC
Pros:Best overall sports conference going IMO. Basketball would square off mostly with Kentucky, and sometimes Florida, for supremacy. KU BB should win similarly to the B12. Gains SE football recruiting to go with Texas. Missouri our greatest rival is there and the rivalry would be reignited. Texas A&M is there and we have some history from the B12 with them. Warm weather for spring and fall sports. Rabid fans. Probably means the SEC is going big and there would be additional B12 schools added as well. Football schedule would see some big name programs every year in Lawrence.
Cons:Not a step up academically from the B12, unless Texas or other AAU type schools are added as well. KU football would eternally struggle to be competitive, most likely, even if they were better just because of all the great schools at the top. Perceived cutthroat recruiting/eligibility issues (real or not).
If conferences only went to 16, and I had a gun against my head, I would probably pick the B1G primarily due to fit/travel and KU FB being more competitive there. But, I would be fine with any of them if the B12 falls apart and all have there good points.
In any scenario, KU's value to a new conference would be maximized by being partnered with a strong football school. So adding us to the B1G or SEC with OU, or to the ACC with UT would make us much more attractive to the new home. Both the ACC and B1G would lead to fantastic schedules in basketball, and we'd add to the SEC or PAC in that area.
As for choosing my overall preference, the B1G would be first - as noted, it's the best cultural, geographic, and academic fit. My 2nd choice would likely be the ACC, largely due to the great basketball matchups that would ensue, although with either that or the PAC we'd probably want to have several neighbors join with us to give us some grounding in the Midwest. The SEC is in many ways a poor cultural fit (more so for KU than it would be for KSU), and we'd be at the far NW corner of the conference geographically, but at least we would be direct neighbors to at least one if not two member states. I share jhawkmvp's reticence about the PAC due to the time zone issue.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - XLance - 06-27-2014 10:28 PM
(06-04-2014 05:13 PM)JRsec Wrote: XLance & JayhawkMVP, I don't think Oklahoma or Texas or Kansas will blow apart the Big 12. I think the networks will eventually blow it apart. They are overpaying for the total value of the conference to keep tabs on 3 or 4 schools they want to maximize profits elsewhere. In the end the networks will broker out the other 5 or 6 schools in order to garner content value in the placement of Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, and possibly Oklahoma State.
Fox and ESPN would have to work together to blow up the Big 12. What's ?the advantage to each network?
I can only see one winner if Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas decide to stay together.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - 10thMountain - 06-28-2014 01:55 PM
I think the end of the B12 GOR will end up in a bidding was to see who can get the Big 3 properties left in the Big 12 (and what price in little brothers/tagalongs they are willing to make to get them)
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 06-28-2014 03:09 PM
I can see it remaining a P5 for a dozen years if we all stay in the NCAA. If there is a breakaway I think the networks will utilize that move to streamline the structure for commercial purposes and we will see a P4. Financially a P4 makes more money for everyone, including the networks where content drives commercial value.
Who knows what will be done if it is brokered as I suspect it might be. Here are a few options to ponder again:
1. W.V.U. to the ACC. Kansas and Oklahoma to the Big 10. Texas, Iowa State, Kansas State and Texas Tech to the PAC. Baylor and Oklahoma State to the SEC.
2. Texas to the ACC. Oklahoma and West Virginia to the SEC. Kansas and Iowa State to the Big 10. Kansas State, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, ? to the PAC. (? could be T.C.U., B.Y.U., a Nevada school, or someone else.)
3. Texas to the ACC. Oklahoma and Baylor to the SEC. Kansas and Connecticut to the Big 10. Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State to the PAC.
4. Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech to the PAC. Kansas and Iowa State to the Big 10. West Virginia to the ACC. Baylor and Kansas State to the SEC.
5. West Virginia to the ACC. Kansas and Oklahoma to the SEC. Texas, Texas Tech, Kansas State and Oklahoma State to the PAC. Iowa State and Connecticut to the Big 10.
or ESPN just handles it:
1. Texas, Oklahoma, Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas State and Kansas to the ACC. N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Oklahoma State and West Virgnia to the SEC.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - He1nousOne - 06-28-2014 09:18 PM
(06-28-2014 01:55 PM)10thMountain Wrote: I think the end of the B12 GOR will end up in a bidding was to see who can get the Big 3 properties left in the Big 12 (and what price in little brothers/tagalongs they are willing to make to get them)
University leaders have to think long term. Whenever anyone talks about how this thing will be held off until the GoR ends, it makes me laugh.
Any leader worth their salt isn't going to wait until that day when they know they will be **** out of luck. They are going to work a negotiation to get themselves a way out of that situation.
This issue ISNT waiting until the end of that GoR. What will happen at the end of that GoR is a perfect leverage point for the likes of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas to get what they want now.
They negotiate a deal to get everyone a landing spot soon. Everyone walks away with an upside including every included conference because they will be negotiating with the Networks as Four major conferences, not five. Any financial analyst will tell you that would make their negotiating position stronger.
The Big 12 GoR will not live out its entire life.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 06-28-2014 09:21 PM
(06-28-2014 09:18 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:(06-28-2014 01:55 PM)10thMountain Wrote: I think the end of the B12 GOR will end up in a bidding was to see who can get the Big 3 properties left in the Big 12 (and what price in little brothers/tagalongs they are willing to make to get them)
University leaders have to think long term. Whenever anyone talks about how this thing will be held off until the GoR ends, it makes me laugh.
Any leader worth their salt isn't going to wait until that day when they know they will be **** out of luck. They are going to work a negotiation to get themselves a way out of that situation.
This issue ISNT waiting until the end of that GoR. What will happen at the end of that GoR is a perfect leverage point for the likes of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas to get what they want now.
They negotiate a deal to get everyone a landing spot soon. Everyone walks away with an upside including every included conference because they will be negotiating with the Networks as Four major conferences, not five. Any financial analyst will tell you that would make their negotiating position stronger.
The Big 12 GoR will not live out its entire life.
Part of that negotiation may also be Bowlsby replacing a retiring Slive at the end of it all.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - He1nousOne - 06-28-2014 09:28 PM
(06-28-2014 09:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:(06-28-2014 09:18 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:(06-28-2014 01:55 PM)10thMountain Wrote: I think the end of the B12 GOR will end up in a bidding was to see who can get the Big 3 properties left in the Big 12 (and what price in little brothers/tagalongs they are willing to make to get them)
University leaders have to think long term. Whenever anyone talks about how this thing will be held off until the GoR ends, it makes me laugh.
Any leader worth their salt isn't going to wait until that day when they know they will be **** out of luck. They are going to work a negotiation to get themselves a way out of that situation.
This issue ISNT waiting until the end of that GoR. What will happen at the end of that GoR is a perfect leverage point for the likes of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas to get what they want now.
They negotiate a deal to get everyone a landing spot soon. Everyone walks away with an upside including every included conference because they will be negotiating with the Networks as Four major conferences, not five. Any financial analyst will tell you that would make their negotiating position stronger.
The Big 12 GoR will not live out its entire life.
Part of that negotiation may also be Bowlsby replacing a retiring Slive at the end of it all.
Are there rumors of Slive looking to retire? My thoughts were more about Bowlsby's golden parachute being him in charge of whatever new body is put in place to run the Major Conferences or maybe even in charge of the NCAA itself.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 06-28-2014 09:32 PM
(06-28-2014 09:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:H1 a week ago he announced he would stay for another year. Every year now is a determination to be made by Slive and Slive wants to see the transition through before retiring. So by all indications once the final moves are made the SEC will likely have a slot for a new Commissioner. Rumors indicate that depending on how things go that may be the parachute for Bowlsby once the Big 12 is history. We'll see.(06-28-2014 09:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:(06-28-2014 09:18 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:(06-28-2014 01:55 PM)10thMountain Wrote: I think the end of the B12 GOR will end up in a bidding was to see who can get the Big 3 properties left in the Big 12 (and what price in little brothers/tagalongs they are willing to make to get them)
University leaders have to think long term. Whenever anyone talks about how this thing will be held off until the GoR ends, it makes me laugh.
Any leader worth their salt isn't going to wait until that day when they know they will be **** out of luck. They are going to work a negotiation to get themselves a way out of that situation.
This issue ISNT waiting until the end of that GoR. What will happen at the end of that GoR is a perfect leverage point for the likes of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas to get what they want now.
They negotiate a deal to get everyone a landing spot soon. Everyone walks away with an upside including every included conference because they will be negotiating with the Networks as Four major conferences, not five. Any financial analyst will tell you that would make their negotiating position stronger.
The Big 12 GoR will not live out its entire life.
Part of that negotiation may also be Bowlsby replacing a retiring Slive at the end of it all.
Are there rumors of Slive looking to retire? My thoughts were more about Bowlsby's golden parachute being him in charge of whatever new body is put in place to run the Major Conferences or maybe even in charge of the NCAA itself.
And when I said part of negotiations I meant it. ESPN will want someone in that position that is as friendly to them as Slive has been, and if Bowlsby can facilitate the brokering of the final moves that may well qualify. There are still many things to be hammered out. Will the PACN sell part interest to FOX or ESPN? What moves are brokered to get the Big 10 and SEC in line with each other? How does the ACC get finished out to 16? There are many variables here to play with still. I could see Texas going West if it meant that ESPN got a percentage of the PACN. I could still see Texas moving to the ACC as an independent. I could still see Texas and 3 western partners moving to the ACC and N.C. State and Virginia Tech moving to the SEC. I can see Kansas and Oklahoma to the Big 10. I could see West Virginia as the school going to the ACC with everyone else in the ACC staying put. It just depends on what it takes to get it done and that is where Bowlsby could prove valuable to everyone.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - He1nousOne - 06-28-2014 10:10 PM
(06-28-2014 09:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:(06-28-2014 09:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:H1 a week ago he announced he would stay for another year. Every year now is a determination to be made by Slive and Slive wants to see the transition through before retiring. So by all indications once the final moves are made the SEC will likely have a slot for a new Commissioner. Rumors indicate that depending on how things go that may be the parachute for Bowlsby once the Big 12 is history. We'll see.(06-28-2014 09:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:(06-28-2014 09:18 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:(06-28-2014 01:55 PM)10thMountain Wrote: I think the end of the B12 GOR will end up in a bidding was to see who can get the Big 3 properties left in the Big 12 (and what price in little brothers/tagalongs they are willing to make to get them)
University leaders have to think long term. Whenever anyone talks about how this thing will be held off until the GoR ends, it makes me laugh.
Any leader worth their salt isn't going to wait until that day when they know they will be **** out of luck. They are going to work a negotiation to get themselves a way out of that situation.
This issue ISNT waiting until the end of that GoR. What will happen at the end of that GoR is a perfect leverage point for the likes of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas to get what they want now.
They negotiate a deal to get everyone a landing spot soon. Everyone walks away with an upside including every included conference because they will be negotiating with the Networks as Four major conferences, not five. Any financial analyst will tell you that would make their negotiating position stronger.
The Big 12 GoR will not live out its entire life.
Part of that negotiation may also be Bowlsby replacing a retiring Slive at the end of it all.
Are there rumors of Slive looking to retire? My thoughts were more about Bowlsby's golden parachute being him in charge of whatever new body is put in place to run the Major Conferences or maybe even in charge of the NCAA itself.
And when I said part of negotiations I meant it. ESPN will want someone in that position that is as friendly to them as Slive has been, and if Bowlsby can facilitate the brokering of the final moves that may well qualify. There are still many things to be hammered out. Will the PACN sell part interest to FOX or ESPN? What moves are brokered to get the Big 10 and SEC in line with each other? How does the ACC get finished out to 16? There are many variables here to play with still. I could see Texas going West if it meant that ESPN got a percentage of the PACN. I could still see Texas moving to the ACC as an independent. I could still see Texas and 3 western partners moving to the ACC and N.C. State and Virginia Tech moving to the SEC. I can see Kansas and Oklahoma to the Big 10. I could see West Virginia as the school going to the ACC with everyone else in the ACC staying put. It just depends on what it takes to get it done and that is where Bowlsby could prove valuable to everyone.
Yes, there are options. I have a favored option but that doesn't mean it is the only option. In regard to Bowlsby to the SEC. I hadn't thought of that previously but I see no flaw in your logic. It is definitely a possibility.
As a side caveat, keeping it up in the air maintains the pressure on the current NCAA President. Bowlsby as a replacement is a strong threat. He has ties in the Big Ten, the PAC and in the Big 12.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 06-28-2014 10:18 PM
(06-28-2014 10:10 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:(06-28-2014 09:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:(06-28-2014 09:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:H1 a week ago he announced he would stay for another year. Every year now is a determination to be made by Slive and Slive wants to see the transition through before retiring. So by all indications once the final moves are made the SEC will likely have a slot for a new Commissioner. Rumors indicate that depending on how things go that may be the parachute for Bowlsby once the Big 12 is history. We'll see.(06-28-2014 09:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:(06-28-2014 09:18 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: University leaders have to think long term. Whenever anyone talks about how this thing will be held off until the GoR ends, it makes me laugh.
Any leader worth their salt isn't going to wait until that day when they know they will be **** out of luck. They are going to work a negotiation to get themselves a way out of that situation.
This issue ISNT waiting until the end of that GoR. What will happen at the end of that GoR is a perfect leverage point for the likes of Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas to get what they want now.
They negotiate a deal to get everyone a landing spot soon. Everyone walks away with an upside including every included conference because they will be negotiating with the Networks as Four major conferences, not five. Any financial analyst will tell you that would make their negotiating position stronger.
The Big 12 GoR will not live out its entire life.
Part of that negotiation may also be Bowlsby replacing a retiring Slive at the end of it all.
Are there rumors of Slive looking to retire? My thoughts were more about Bowlsby's golden parachute being him in charge of whatever new body is put in place to run the Major Conferences or maybe even in charge of the NCAA itself.
And when I said part of negotiations I meant it. ESPN will want someone in that position that is as friendly to them as Slive has been, and if Bowlsby can facilitate the brokering of the final moves that may well qualify. There are still many things to be hammered out. Will the PACN sell part interest to FOX or ESPN? What moves are brokered to get the Big 10 and SEC in line with each other? How does the ACC get finished out to 16? There are many variables here to play with still. I could see Texas going West if it meant that ESPN got a percentage of the PACN. I could still see Texas moving to the ACC as an independent. I could still see Texas and 3 western partners moving to the ACC and N.C. State and Virginia Tech moving to the SEC. I can see Kansas and Oklahoma to the Big 10. I could see West Virginia as the school going to the ACC with everyone else in the ACC staying put. It just depends on what it takes to get it done and that is where Bowlsby could prove valuable to everyone.
Yes, there are options. I have a favored option but that doesn't mean it is the only option. In regard to Bowlsby to the SEC. I hadn't thought of that previously but I see no flaw in your logic. It is definitely a possibility.
As a side caveat, keeping it up in the air maintains the pressure on the current NCAA President. Bowlsby as a replacement is a strong threat. He has ties in the Big Ten, the PAC and in the Big 12.
I have heard that suggestion floated as well and it too is plausible. It just depends on whether what the P5 wants is fully granted by the others or a breakaway becomes the only way to attain it. Options exist there as well. I am sure that most of the major players have fully agreed upon the options, and are just waiting to see which ones are viable based on outcomes of litigation and NCAA votes.
It's like they know they are holding a winning hand, but need to see what is played to get the order of their progression precisely laid.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - jhawkmvp - 06-30-2014 02:32 AM
(06-28-2014 10:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:(06-28-2014 10:10 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:(06-28-2014 09:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:(06-28-2014 09:28 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:H1 a week ago he announced he would stay for another year. Every year now is a determination to be made by Slive and Slive wants to see the transition through before retiring. So by all indications once the final moves are made the SEC will likely have a slot for a new Commissioner. Rumors indicate that depending on how things go that may be the parachute for Bowlsby once the Big 12 is history. We'll see.(06-28-2014 09:21 PM)JRsec Wrote: Part of that negotiation may also be Bowlsby replacing a retiring Slive at the end of it all.
Are there rumors of Slive looking to retire? My thoughts were more about Bowlsby's golden parachute being him in charge of whatever new body is put in place to run the Major Conferences or maybe even in charge of the NCAA itself.
And when I said part of negotiations I meant it. ESPN will want someone in that position that is as friendly to them as Slive has been, and if Bowlsby can facilitate the brokering of the final moves that may well qualify. There are still many things to be hammered out. Will the PACN sell part interest to FOX or ESPN? What moves are brokered to get the Big 10 and SEC in line with each other? How does the ACC get finished out to 16? There are many variables here to play with still. I could see Texas going West if it meant that ESPN got a percentage of the PACN. I could still see Texas moving to the ACC as an independent. I could still see Texas and 3 western partners moving to the ACC and N.C. State and Virginia Tech moving to the SEC. I can see Kansas and Oklahoma to the Big 10. I could see West Virginia as the school going to the ACC with everyone else in the ACC staying put. It just depends on what it takes to get it done and that is where Bowlsby could prove valuable to everyone.
Yes, there are options. I have a favored option but that doesn't mean it is the only option. In regard to Bowlsby to the SEC. I hadn't thought of that previously but I see no flaw in your logic. It is definitely a possibility.
As a side caveat, keeping it up in the air maintains the pressure on the current NCAA President. Bowlsby as a replacement is a strong threat. He has ties in the Big Ten, the PAC and in the Big 12.
I have heard that suggestion floated as well and it too is plausible. It just depends on whether what the P5 wants is fully granted by the others or a breakaway becomes the only way to attain it. Options exist there as well. I am sure that most of the major players have fully agreed upon the options, and are just waiting to see which ones are viable based on outcomes of litigation and NCAA votes.
It's like they know they are holding a winning hand, but need to see what is played to get the order of their progression precisely laid.
Bowlsby will have options. I think he ends up running one of the conferences or whatever the new division/alliance/association ends up being if the B12 takes a dirtnap.
Sure looks like things are coming to a head with the NCAA peeing down it's leg in court lately. I am guessing by August we'll have a solid idea on where things are heading or be greatly entertained by the conferences fighting over what the new college sports landscape will look like.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - BearcatBeta - 07-07-2014 01:23 PM
(07-10-2013 09:50 AM)LSUtah Wrote:(07-10-2013 08:46 AM)10thMountain Wrote: That's just it Van,
Realignment has made OSU and TTU (and TCU and BU) MORE dependent on their big brothers, not less.
The idea that OU or UT could ditch them because another power conference would pick them up is wishful thinking at best. None of the power conferences want them without big brother and most arent even willing to take little brother to get big brother.
The PAC is the only power conference willing to take the 4 team combo of UT/TT/OU/OSU that satisfies all the legislators involved. That's just reality and saying things like "UT can ditch TTU because the PAC will take TTU" is wishful thinking to make a scenario work.
In 10 years, when the GOR runs out, UT has a choice to make: move west with their entourage of OU, OSU and TT or stay put...that's really it.
Agree completely. We will probably see little in the way of conference realignment until that day happens, and my bet is that there is a good chance the "Texoma 4" are eventually part of a PAC-16. An eastern division anchored by TEXAS/USC and a western division anchored by USC/OREGON? Good grief...that is a very good product right there.
At that point WVU and most likely Kansas State to the SEC (unless an unlikely NC or VA school falls out of the ACC).
Sorry hayhiggs, but Cinci will not be invited to the party for all the reasons outlined by vandiver. The reality is there are more Ohio State fans in Cincy than Bearcat fans (just like there are more TEXAS and TAMU fans in Dallas than TCU fans). It's a game of flagships for the B1G, PAC and SEC. The Big12 remaining viable is Cincy's only hope...maybe ACC if Cincy goes on a mad run.
The reality is that there are more UC grads in greater Cincinnati (70000),
than tosu grads in greater Cincinnati (8500). Plus tosu's basketball program sucks. Any loss by tosu makes for a great weekend.
Try getting a NC home game with tosu 100 miles from Columbus. Duck and weave is all they have.
Cincinnati a large untapped market that would draw huge crowds, with PBS as a backup. And Ohio a significant recruiting ground.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - SuperFlyBCat - 07-07-2014 04:07 PM
(07-07-2014 01:23 PM)BearcatBeta Wrote:utern(07-10-2013 09:50 AM)LSUtah Wrote:(07-10-2013 08:46 AM)10thMountain Wrote: That's just it Van,
Realignment has made OSU and TTU (and TCU and BU) MORE dependent on their big brothers, not less.
The idea that OU or UT could ditch them because another power conference would pick them up is wishful thinking at best. None of the power conferences want them without big brother and most arent even willing to take little brother to get big brother.
The PAC is the only power conference willing to take the 4 team combo of UT/TT/OU/OSU that satisfies all the legislators involved. That's just reality and saying things like "UT can ditch TTU because the PAC will take TTU" is wishful thinking to make a scenario work.
In 10 years, when the GOR runs out, UT has a choice to make: move west with their entourage of OU, OSU and TT or stay put...that's really it.
Agree completely. We will probably see little in the way of conference realignment until that day happens, and my bet is that there is a good chance the "Texoma 4" are eventually part of a PAC-16. An eastern division anchored by TEXAS/USC and a western division anchored by USC/OREGON? Good grief...that is a very good product right there.
At that point WVU and most likely Kansas State to the SEC (unless an unlikely NC or VA school falls out of the ACC).
Sorry hayhiggs, but Cinci will not be invited to the party for all the reasons outlined by vandiver. The reality is there are more Ohio State fans in Cincy than Bearcat fans (just like there are more TEXAS and TAMU fans in Dallas than TCU fans). It's a game of flagships for the B1G, PAC and SEC. The Big12 remaining viable is Cincy's only hope...maybe ACC if Cincy goes on a mad run.
The reality is that there are more UC grads in greater Cincinnati (70000),
than tosu grads in greater Cincinnati (8500). Plus tosu's basketball program sucks. Any loss by tosu makes for a great weekend.
Try getting a NC home game with tosu 100 miles from Columbus. Duck and weave is all they have.
Cincinnati a large untapped market that would draw huge crowds, with PBS as a backup. And Ohio a significant recruiting ground.
LSUtah, that is crazy. Cincinnati is by far the most popular team in the metro area. The second most popular would be UK. The southern portion of our metro area is in Kentucky.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - BearcatsUC - 07-07-2014 05:02 PM
(07-07-2014 04:07 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:(07-07-2014 01:23 PM)BearcatBeta Wrote:utern(07-10-2013 09:50 AM)LSUtah Wrote:(07-10-2013 08:46 AM)10thMountain Wrote: That's just it Van,
Realignment has made OSU and TTU (and TCU and BU) MORE dependent on their big brothers, not less.
The idea that OU or UT could ditch them because another power conference would pick them up is wishful thinking at best. None of the power conferences want them without big brother and most arent even willing to take little brother to get big brother.
The PAC is the only power conference willing to take the 4 team combo of UT/TT/OU/OSU that satisfies all the legislators involved. That's just reality and saying things like "UT can ditch TTU because the PAC will take TTU" is wishful thinking to make a scenario work.
In 10 years, when the GOR runs out, UT has a choice to make: move west with their entourage of OU, OSU and TT or stay put...that's really it.
Agree completely. We will probably see little in the way of conference realignment until that day happens, and my bet is that there is a good chance the "Texoma 4" are eventually part of a PAC-16. An eastern division anchored by TEXAS/USC and a western division anchored by USC/OREGON? Good grief...that is a very good product right there.
At that point WVU and most likely Kansas State to the SEC (unless an unlikely NC or VA school falls out of the ACC).
Sorry hayhiggs, but Cinci will not be invited to the party for all the reasons outlined by vandiver. The reality is there are more Ohio State fans in Cincy than Bearcat fans (just like there are more TEXAS and TAMU fans in Dallas than TCU fans). It's a game of flagships for the B1G, PAC and SEC. The Big12 remaining viable is Cincy's only hope...maybe ACC if Cincy goes on a mad run.
The reality is that there are more UC grads in greater Cincinnati (70000),
than tosu grads in greater Cincinnati (8500). Plus tosu's basketball program sucks. Any loss by tosu makes for a great weekend.
Try getting a NC home game with tosu 100 miles from Columbus. Duck and weave is all they have.
Cincinnati a large untapped market that would draw huge crowds, with PBS as a backup. And Ohio a significant recruiting ground.
LSUtah, that is crazy. Cincinnati is by far the most popular team in the metro area. The second most popular would be UK. The southern portion of our metro area is in Kentucky.
Yeah, there's no question that SW Ohio is geared more toward UC than Ohio State, though I always heard there were 100,000+ grads in the area, not 70,000. I'll have to verify.
About 425,000 of Cincy metro's residents live in Northern Kentucky. You are crazy if you think O$U has any form of dominance there. Not over UC, and certainly not over UK.
I'm not here to suggest UC should be in the SEC; however, I'm big on getting the facts straight.
This is only my opinion, but having the SEC invade B1G territory would so some significant damage. UC in the SEC would be O$U's worst nightmare, considering the Buckeyes have a HUGE insecurity complex. This will never happen but it sure is fun to think about it.
Would probably make life more difficult for WVU as well.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - Bearcat Billy - 07-07-2014 06:52 PM
(07-07-2014 05:02 PM)BearcatsUC Wrote:(07-07-2014 04:07 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:(07-07-2014 01:23 PM)BearcatBeta Wrote:utern(07-10-2013 09:50 AM)LSUtah Wrote:(07-10-2013 08:46 AM)10thMountain Wrote: That's just it Van,
Realignment has made OSU and TTU (and TCU and BU) MORE dependent on their big brothers, not less.
The idea that OU or UT could ditch them because another power conference would pick them up is wishful thinking at best. None of the power conferences want them without big brother and most arent even willing to take little brother to get big brother.
The PAC is the only power conference willing to take the 4 team combo of UT/TT/OU/OSU that satisfies all the legislators involved. That's just reality and saying things like "UT can ditch TTU because the PAC will take TTU" is wishful thinking to make a scenario work.
In 10 years, when the GOR runs out, UT has a choice to make: move west with their entourage of OU, OSU and TT or stay put...that's really it.
Agree completely. We will probably see little in the way of conference realignment until that day happens, and my bet is that there is a good chance the "Texoma 4" are eventually part of a PAC-16. An eastern division anchored by TEXAS/USC and a western division anchored by USC/OREGON? Good grief...that is a very good product right there.
At that point WVU and most likely Kansas State to the SEC (unless an unlikely NC or VA school falls out of the ACC).
Sorry hayhiggs, but Cinci will not be invited to the party for all the reasons outlined by vandiver. The reality is there are more Ohio State fans in Cincy than Bearcat fans (just like there are more TEXAS and TAMU fans in Dallas than TCU fans). It's a game of flagships for the B1G, PAC and SEC. The Big12 remaining viable is Cincy's only hope...maybe ACC if Cincy goes on a mad run.
The reality is that there are more UC grads in greater Cincinnati (70000),
than tosu grads in greater Cincinnati (8500). Plus tosu's basketball program sucks. Any loss by tosu makes for a great weekend.
Try getting a NC home game with tosu 100 miles from Columbus. Duck and weave is all they have.
Cincinnati a large untapped market that would draw huge crowds, with PBS as a backup. And Ohio a significant recruiting ground.
LSUtah, that is crazy. Cincinnati is by far the most popular team in the metro area. The second most popular would be UK. The southern portion of our metro area is in Kentucky.
Yeah, there's no question that SW Ohio is geared more toward UC than Ohio State, though I always heard there were 100,000+ grads in the area, not 70,000. I'll have to verify.
About 425,000 of Cincy metro's residents live in Northern Kentucky. You are crazy if you think O$U has any form of dominance there. Not over UC, and certainly not over UK.
I'm not here to suggest UC should be in the SEC; however, I'm big on getting the facts straight.
This is only my opinion, but having the SEC invade B1G territory would so some significant damage. UC in the SEC would be O$U's worst nightmare, considering the Buckeyes have a HUGE insecurity complex. This will never happen but it sure is fun to think about it.
Would probably make life more difficult for WVU as well.
As I stated in another thread, an SEC team on any given weekend in Paul Brown Stadium would sell out and be tosu worst nightmare. There is a reason that they continue to try and keep UC down. Most SEC schools already recruit the Cincy area like crazy--another thing that drives tosu mad.
Cincy is the northern most southern town. We have nothing in common with the rest of Ohio.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 07-07-2014 08:23 PM
(07-07-2014 06:52 PM)Bearcat Billy Wrote:(07-07-2014 05:02 PM)BearcatsUC Wrote:(07-07-2014 04:07 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:(07-07-2014 01:23 PM)BearcatBeta Wrote:utern(07-10-2013 09:50 AM)LSUtah Wrote: Agree completely. We will probably see little in the way of conference realignment until that day happens, and my bet is that there is a good chance the "Texoma 4" are eventually part of a PAC-16. An eastern division anchored by TEXAS/USC and a western division anchored by USC/OREGON? Good grief...that is a very good product right there.
At that point WVU and most likely Kansas State to the SEC (unless an unlikely NC or VA school falls out of the ACC).
Sorry hayhiggs, but Cinci will not be invited to the party for all the reasons outlined by vandiver. The reality is there are more Ohio State fans in Cincy than Bearcat fans (just like there are more TEXAS and TAMU fans in Dallas than TCU fans). It's a game of flagships for the B1G, PAC and SEC. The Big12 remaining viable is Cincy's only hope...maybe ACC if Cincy goes on a mad run.
The reality is that there are more UC grads in greater Cincinnati (70000),
than tosu grads in greater Cincinnati (8500). Plus tosu's basketball program sucks. Any loss by tosu makes for a great weekend.
Try getting a NC home game with tosu 100 miles from Columbus. Duck and weave is all they have.
Cincinnati a large untapped market that would draw huge crowds, with PBS as a backup. And Ohio a significant recruiting ground.
LSUtah, that is crazy. Cincinnati is by far the most popular team in the metro area. The second most popular would be UK. The southern portion of our metro area is in Kentucky.
Yeah, there's no question that SW Ohio is geared more toward UC than Ohio State, though I always heard there were 100,000+ grads in the area, not 70,000. I'll have to verify.
About 425,000 of Cincy metro's residents live in Northern Kentucky. You are crazy if you think O$U has any form of dominance there. Not over UC, and certainly not over UK.
I'm not here to suggest UC should be in the SEC; however, I'm big on getting the facts straight.
This is only my opinion, but having the SEC invade B1G territory would so some significant damage. UC in the SEC would be O$U's worst nightmare, considering the Buckeyes have a HUGE insecurity complex. This will never happen but it sure is fun to think about it.
Would probably make life more difficult for WVU as well.
As I stated in another thread, an SEC team on any given weekend in Paul Brown Stadium would sell out and be tosu worst nightmare. There is a reason that they continue to try and keep UC down. Most SEC schools already recruit the Cincy area like crazy--another thing that drives tosu mad.
While a Cincinnati move to the SEC would open interesting possibilities it would not be high on the SEC target priority list. But that doesn't mean the concept is impossible, but rather that it would require a specific set of circumstances to come to fruition. For instance if the P5 remain intact and expansion to 16 each is desired then possibilities will open up for South Florida, East Carolina, Connecticut, Central Florida, Cincinnati, Brigham Young and possibly a few others. Profitability in that case will favor the new market and then the Bearcats and Pirates could become of interest to the SEC. Even if the SEC opted for another Florida school and East Carolina I would have to think that Cincinnati would at least become very enticing to an expanding Big 12.
Remember in such a scenario you are no longer competing with the dream selections of these conferences. The state of Virginia and North Carolina (except for E.C.U.) would be out of reach to the SEC. Clemson and Florida State dreams would be moot for the Big 12. In this scenario Cincinnati only has to stack up against the list I provided and they should do that favorably enough to land either in the SEC, Big 12, or perhaps even the ACC. But in my opinion that is your best case scenario for landing in a P5 conference. Why? Because all other scenarios will involve the division of the Big 12 and likely would mean no more than 64 or 65 schools in the remaining P4. In any of those scenarios you are competing for that spot with Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State, Texas Tech and Baylor and West Virginia.
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - jhawkmvp - 07-08-2014 03:18 AM
Since a part of Cincinnati is in Kentucky wouldn't the SEC already get the full SECN rate in the Cincinnati DMA? If so that would reduce UC value to the SEC some, though adding them would give some negotiating power for the rest of Ohio, but how much? I think the B12 or ACC are UC's best hopes. UC would have the most value to those conferences and would be able to compete better there.
I feel for Cincinnati (UConn, BYU, and many others as well) because it has to be extremely frustrating to be on the cusp of a power conference invite (and having lost a power conference spot previously in some cases) at this uncertain and perilous period in realignment. If I was them I'd be praying for 5x16 or 4x20 (top 80 schools) like JRSec mentioned. I'd hope that the new division or breakaway doesn't require power conference membership, but instead certain metrics that need to be met (attendance, revenue, etc.) and a willingness to pay the extra expenses likely to be involved going forward (stipends, full cost of attendance, etc.).