CSNbbs
If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - Printable Version

+- 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? - Transic_nyc - 12-05-2014 04:51 PM

JRSec,

What do you make of the rumors that the Big 12 is contemplating adding Cincinnati and Memphis? If you go by conventional wisdom that the B12 can't add unless it's from other P5 conferences then, yes, it could be viewed as a negative. However, the other scenario is that the B12 is feeling more positive about its future and could enter new markets to expand its presence. What happens if the B12 expands?

Cincinnati would put the B12 in a good recruiting state of Ohio. Memphis would see them enter the Mid-South and put its flag into SEC territory. Neither are FSU and Clemson but they may help the B12 in other ways. Add to that the Sugar Bowl deal and already working with the SEC in other areas like bringing in several SEC teams for non-revenue sports like rowing and it seems that there's no reason to believe that there would be a radical realignment in the near future.

This would also present an interesting scenario for UConn. They might benefit from a third conference increasing its presence further east, giving them another option for escaping G5 purgatory.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 12-05-2014 05:36 PM

(12-05-2014 04:51 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  JRSec,

What do you make of the rumors that the Big 12 is contemplating adding Cincinnati and Memphis? If you go by conventional wisdom that the B12 can't add unless it's from other P5 conferences then, yes, it could be viewed as a negative. However, the other scenario is that the B12 is feeling more positive about its future and could enter new markets to expand its presence. What happens if the B12 expands?

Cincinnati would put the B12 in a good recruiting state of Ohio. Memphis would see them enter the Mid-South and put its flag into SEC territory. Neither are FSU and Clemson but they may help the B12 in other ways. Add to that the Sugar Bowl deal and already working with the SEC in other areas like bringing in several SEC teams for non-revenue sports like rowing and it seems that there's no reason to believe that there would be a radical realignment in the near future.

This would also present an interesting scenario for UConn. They might benefit from a third conference increasing its presence further east, giving them another option for escaping G5 purgatory.

Transic, in every thread for the past two years when the demise of the Big 12 has been discussed I have stated that "any additions" by the Big 12 precludes future expansion from the Big 12. Should the Big 12 expand by adding Cincinnati and Memphis it would mean that a P5 would likely be cemented for decades to come. (Expansion from the ACC by the Big 12 would mean a P4 because it would only happen if the Big 10 and SEC were also expanding out of the ACC, but in that case additions to the existing Big 12 like a Memphis would only be wasting a spot for more valuable property. Cincinnati however could be a target for the Big 12 even if expansion from the ACC were occurring. Example: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, N.C. State, Louisville, and Cincinnati to get to 16.)

However, let's say that the Big 12 expands to 12 with two of whomever and the ACC remains stable. The question is what does that mean? I believe that would mean that all remaining East Coast Power Conferences would be forced to look at developing existing brands in a move to 16. Perhaps the Big 10 looks to Connecticut quickly out of fear that the ACC will add them. The SEC might start to look at schools like East Carolina and Central Florida for the addition of markets and the protection of their interest in South Florida. Tulane would be of interest to both the Big 12 and ACC at that point and if the ACC went for Tulane perhaps Houston enters their picture. Even Temple could hold some sway with the ACC.

In other words an expansion for the Big 12 from existing G5 schools could well signal to all of the other P5 that any future expansion for markets or ease of scheduling or structural changes to internal playoffs would necessitate their development of less stellar brands by elevating them and giving their programs the money needed to compete. The P5 could then end up being somewhere between 76 and 80 schools.

All of that now said, I will be floored if Texas and Oklahoma permit such a move and lock themselves into making peers of lesser schools. They've stayed at 10 to give themselves more options. I don't think that they close that window now.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - XLance - 12-05-2014 08:24 PM

http://www.news-record.com/blogs/sports_extra/loss-in-green-leaves-unc-s-williams-a-little-red/article_e799c26e-7c04-11e4-b10e-f394b977dec3.html

Two things:
1)What athletic departments have to do to make a profit and how it impacts the people involved.
2)For all of you that think that football provides 80% of revenue, re-read the NET income figures for football and basketball.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - He1nousOne - 12-05-2014 10:25 PM

Memphis and Cinci to the Big 12? 03-lmfao

Smoke and Mirrors.

It is good that such things are coming out. It is either nothing at all or it is part of the maneuvering. If the Big 12 had any talks at all about those schools, it would simply be a bluffing show of force that they might not go along with "The Big Plan" because of the way the season is going right now.

They wont do it, they probably just want more concessions given to them in the negotiations. They don't actually want Memphis and Cinci. That bluff is likely to be called or at best a cursory concession is given in order to move along negotiations.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 12-06-2014 06:17 AM

(12-05-2014 10:25 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Memphis and Cinci to the Big 12? 03-lmfao

Smoke and Mirrors.

It is good that such things are coming out. It is either nothing at all or it is part of the maneuvering. If the Big 12 had any talks at all about those schools, it would simply be a bluffing show of force that they might not go along with "The Big Plan" because of the way the season is going right now.

They wont do it, they probably just want more concessions given to them in the negotiations. They don't actually want Memphis and Cinci. That bluff is likely to be called or at best a cursory concession is given in order to move along negotiations.

I agree with this assessment. There is no way that Texas and Oklahoma want to be hooked into a relationship with Memphis, Cincinnati, Iowa State, and T.C.U. forever. Texas may be stuck politically with the Red Raiders, but the core of the SWC/Big 12 is Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Baylor. The strangle hold is that all of them other than Baylor have a little brother problem. There are only two conferences that could accommodate the little brothers. The PAC could do it by taking 8. The SEC could do it by taking 6. But here are the issues. The SEC already has the largest state in its footprint. Oklahoma and Kansas aren't worth a pair each. The PAC would have to go big to pull it off and until they sell a portion of their network to ESPN they will have trouble landing schools under contract to ESPN.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - vandiver49 - 12-06-2014 09:54 AM

(12-06-2014 06:17 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-05-2014 10:25 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Memphis and Cinci to the Big 12? 03-lmfao

Smoke and Mirrors.

It is good that such things are coming out. It is either nothing at all or it is part of the maneuvering. If the Big 12 had any talks at all about those schools, it would simply be a bluffing show of force that they might not go along with "The Big Plan" because of the way the season is going right now.

They wont do it, they probably just want more concessions given to them in the negotiations. They don't actually want Memphis and Cinci. That bluff is likely to be called or at best a cursory concession is given in order to move along negotiations.

I agree with this assessment. There is no way that Texas and Oklahoma want to be hooked into a relationship with Memphis, Cincinnati, Iowa State, and T.C.U. forever. Texas may be stuck politically with the Red Raiders, but the core of the SWC/Big 12 is Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Baylor. The strangle hold is that all of them other than Baylor have a little brother problem. There are only two conferences that could accommodate the little brothers. The PAC could do it by taking 8. The SEC could do it by taking 6. But here are the issues. The SEC already has the largest state in its footprint. Oklahoma and Kansas aren't worth a pair each. The PAC would have to go big to pull it off and until they sell a portion of their network to ESPN they will have trouble landing schools under contract to ESPN.

I also concur. But it's not just the Texahoma 4 that would be opposed to it, but ISU, KSU as well. They aren't interested in being in a division with Cincy and Memphis not are they looking to see less visit from Texas teams. I'm not sure if it's an angle for concussions though. What would Texas want short of a ND type deal that they couldn't get from the B12 by simply asking?


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - He1nousOne - 12-06-2014 11:49 AM

(12-06-2014 09:54 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 06:17 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-05-2014 10:25 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Memphis and Cinci to the Big 12? 03-lmfao

Smoke and Mirrors.

It is good that such things are coming out. It is either nothing at all or it is part of the maneuvering. If the Big 12 had any talks at all about those schools, it would simply be a bluffing show of force that they might not go along with "The Big Plan" because of the way the season is going right now.

They wont do it, they probably just want more concessions given to them in the negotiations. They don't actually want Memphis and Cinci. That bluff is likely to be called or at best a cursory concession is given in order to move along negotiations.

I agree with this assessment. There is no way that Texas and Oklahoma want to be hooked into a relationship with Memphis, Cincinnati, Iowa State, and T.C.U. forever. Texas may be stuck politically with the Red Raiders, but the core of the SWC/Big 12 is Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Baylor. The strangle hold is that all of them other than Baylor have a little brother problem. There are only two conferences that could accommodate the little brothers. The PAC could do it by taking 8. The SEC could do it by taking 6. But here are the issues. The SEC already has the largest state in its footprint. Oklahoma and Kansas aren't worth a pair each. The PAC would have to go big to pull it off and until they sell a portion of their network to ESPN they will have trouble landing schools under contract to ESPN.

I also concur. But it's not just the Texahoma 4 that would be opposed to it, but ISU, KSU as well. They aren't interested in being in a division with Cincy and Memphis not are they looking to see less visit from Texas teams. I'm not sure if it's an angle for concussions though. What would Texas want short of a ND type deal that they couldn't get from the B12 by simply asking?

It could be anything really. It is hard to say what specifics are in doubt. For one, I don't think Texas wants to be the bad guy. They have been portrayed as the bad guys quite a bit. I think they want EVERY Big 12 school to get a landing spot. I don't think they want to go out West at all. I think they are probably willing to allow the LHN to be rolled into an ACC Network BUT they are still going to want some of their individual programs to be aired upon it.

That last point makes things difficult because ESPN would have to figure out how to do that for every single ACC school on the ACC Network. That means regionalized programming. That means having to have more programming than the minimal amount. There is more cost involved in that. Do they make the schools pay for that? That will cause some of the smaller, less wealthy schools in the ACC to balk. It is a more complicated situation than we generally talk about on these boards. That is why the negotiations are taking so long.

This whole Memphis and Cinci talk reeks of being a bluff. Let's keep in mind that the likes of Memphis and Cinci are positioned to profit from the demise of the Big 12. If it blows up then we will see some new rules passed very quickly. Those rules will allow the AAC to finally put distance between themselves and the other mid majors.

It is in their best interest to play along, even if they know they aren't actually going to get into the Big 12. Hell, maybe they do think they have a chance and they are being played too. I don't know.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - completely_bias - 12-06-2014 01:54 PM

In my opinion the perfect additions would be OU and Texas. Both programs have great and rich traditions, along with a geographical fit. The fact that these two schools are in pipeline states only makes them better fits because recruiting competition breads better games during the season. Also adding Texas would bring a lot of money to the conference assuming that they would give up their independent TV contract and fall inline with the standard SEC TV deals. Lets not forget that the addition of these two programs would further separate the SEC as the best conference in CFB


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - completely_bias - 12-06-2014 02:00 PM

(07-06-2013 10:21 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I would add Oklahoma for sure. But I would add Cincinnati before I added anyone else. The potential market is just to great to pass up.

How can you add Cincinnati to South Eastern Conference when the when the program is located in a completely different geographic location?


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine - 12-06-2014 02:10 PM

(12-06-2014 02:00 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(07-06-2013 10:21 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I would add Oklahoma for sure. But I would add Cincinnati before I added anyone else. The potential market is just to great to pass up.

How can you add Cincinnati to South Eastern Conference when the when the program is located in a completely different geographic location?

Because Missouri and Texas just screams Southeastern. 03-lmfao


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - completely_bias - 12-06-2014 03:04 PM

(12-06-2014 02:10 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:00 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(07-06-2013 10:21 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I would add Oklahoma for sure. But I would add Cincinnati before I added anyone else. The potential market is just to great to pass up.

How can you add Cincinnati to South Eastern Conference when the when the program is located in a completely different geographic location?

Because Missouri and Texas just screams Southeastern. 03-lmfao

anything west of Texas would be pushing it


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - He1nousOne - 12-06-2014 03:16 PM

(12-06-2014 03:04 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:10 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:00 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(07-06-2013 10:21 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I would add Oklahoma for sure. But I would add Cincinnati before I added anyone else. The potential market is just to great to pass up.

How can you add Cincinnati to South Eastern Conference when the when the program is located in a completely different geographic location?

Because Missouri and Texas just screams Southeastern. 03-lmfao

anything west of Texas would be pushing it

The Houston area of Texas could probably be considered more Southeastern in culture than Southwestern thus why The Aggies fit.

Anything west of that though, definitely Southwest not Southeast. Texas is far too large and far too diverse to make the statement that you did.

I do agree with you that the best bet for the SEC would be Texas and Oklahoma, that is a no brainer and would be the case for any conference.

My question to you though would be whether or not you actually believe that could happen?


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine - 12-06-2014 03:43 PM

(12-06-2014 03:04 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:10 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:00 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(07-06-2013 10:21 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I would add Oklahoma for sure. But I would add Cincinnati before I added anyone else. The potential market is just to great to pass up.

How can you add Cincinnati to South Eastern Conference when the when the program is located in a completely different geographic location?

Because Missouri and Texas just screams Southeastern. 03-lmfao

anything west of Texas would be pushing it

Well, the Confederacy did invade New Mexico. How about New Mexico State? 04-cheers

(12-06-2014 03:16 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 03:04 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:10 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:00 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(07-06-2013 10:21 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I would add Oklahoma for sure. But I would add Cincinnati before I added anyone else. The potential market is just to great to pass up.

How can you add Cincinnati to South Eastern Conference when the when the program is located in a completely different geographic location?

Because Missouri and Texas just screams Southeastern. 03-lmfao

anything west of Texas would be pushing it

The Houston area of Texas could probably be considered more Southeastern in culture than Southwestern thus why The Aggies fit.

Anything west of that though, definitely Southwest not Southeast. Texas is far too large and far too diverse to make the statement that you did.

I do agree with you that the best bet for the SEC would be Texas and Oklahoma, that is a no brainer and would be the case for any conference.

My question to you though would be whether or not you actually believe that could happen?


As you said, culture doesn't always recognize geography. I cannot see Texas giving up its kingdom in the BIG 12 for a fiefdom in the SEC. Even the deposed emperors of the Latin Empire begged across Europe and sold holy relics to regain their kingdom instead of settling for a principality.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - completely_bias - 12-06-2014 04:01 PM

(12-06-2014 03:16 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 03:04 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:10 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:00 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(07-06-2013 10:21 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I would add Oklahoma for sure. But I would add Cincinnati before I added anyone else. The potential market is just to great to pass up.

How can you add Cincinnati to South Eastern Conference when the when the program is located in a completely different geographic location?

Because Missouri and Texas just screams Southeastern. 03-lmfao

anything west of Texas would be pushing it

The Houston area of Texas could probably be considered more Southeastern in culture than Southwestern thus why The Aggies fit.

Anything west of that though, definitely Southwest not Southeast. Texas is far too large and far too diverse to make the statement that you did.

I do agree with you that the best bet for the SEC would be Texas and Oklahoma, that is a no brainer and would be the case for any conference.

My question to you though would be whether or not you actually believe that could happen?

I personally am under the impression that Texas believes that staying put where they are is the most financially lucrative option, that being said I still believe that the lore of the SEC power is too much to resist


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - colohank - 12-06-2014 04:06 PM

(12-06-2014 02:00 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(07-06-2013 10:21 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I would add Oklahoma for sure. But I would add Cincinnati before I added anyone else. The potential market is just to great to pass up.

How can you add Cincinnati to South Eastern Conference when the when the program is located in a completely different geographic location?

Not so completely different. Cincinnati is about 80 miles north of UK's campus in Lexington, KY. That said, UC probably wouldn't be a good fit with the SEC, and the SEC certainly wouldn't be interested in recruiting Greater Cincinnati's high school football talent. Better to let sleeping dogs lie.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 12-06-2014 04:50 PM

(12-06-2014 03:43 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 03:04 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:10 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:00 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(07-06-2013 10:21 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I would add Oklahoma for sure. But I would add Cincinnati before I added anyone else. The potential market is just to great to pass up.

How can you add Cincinnati to South Eastern Conference when the when the program is located in a completely different geographic location?

Because Missouri and Texas just screams Southeastern. 03-lmfao

anything west of Texas would be pushing it

Well, the Confederacy did invade New Mexico. How about New Mexico State? 04-cheers

(12-06-2014 03:16 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 03:04 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:10 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:00 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  How can you add Cincinnati to South Eastern Conference when the when the program is located in a completely different geographic location?

Because Missouri and Texas just screams Southeastern. 03-lmfao

anything west of Texas would be pushing it

The Houston area of Texas could probably be considered more Southeastern in culture than Southwestern thus why The Aggies fit.

Anything west of that though, definitely Southwest not Southeast. Texas is far too large and far too diverse to make the statement that you did.

I do agree with you that the best bet for the SEC would be Texas and Oklahoma, that is a no brainer and would be the case for any conference.

My question to you though would be whether or not you actually believe that could happen?


As you said, culture doesn't always recognize geography. I cannot see Texas giving up its kingdom in the BIG 12 for a fiefdom in the SEC. Even the deposed emperors of the Latin Empire begged across Europe and sold holy relics to regain their kingdom instead of settling for a principality.

The Confederacy invaded Pennsylvania too, but you don't see me clamoring for Pittsburgh to go with West Virginia. Besides that foray didn't turn out so well. And when the Confederacy invaded New Mexico they did so for an easy Homecoming opponent.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine - 12-06-2014 05:02 PM

(12-06-2014 04:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 03:43 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 03:04 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:10 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:00 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  How can you add Cincinnati to South Eastern Conference when the when the program is located in a completely different geographic location?

Because Missouri and Texas just screams Southeastern. 03-lmfao

anything west of Texas would be pushing it

Well, the Confederacy did invade New Mexico. How about New Mexico State? 04-cheers

(12-06-2014 03:16 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 03:04 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:10 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  Because Missouri and Texas just screams Southeastern. 03-lmfao

anything west of Texas would be pushing it

The Houston area of Texas could probably be considered more Southeastern in culture than Southwestern thus why The Aggies fit.

Anything west of that though, definitely Southwest not Southeast. Texas is far too large and far too diverse to make the statement that you did.

I do agree with you that the best bet for the SEC would be Texas and Oklahoma, that is a no brainer and would be the case for any conference.

My question to you though would be whether or not you actually believe that could happen?


As you said, culture doesn't always recognize geography. I cannot see Texas giving up its kingdom in the BIG 12 for a fiefdom in the SEC. Even the deposed emperors of the Latin Empire begged across Europe and sold holy relics to regain their kingdom instead of settling for a principality.

The Confederacy invaded Pennsylvania too, but you don't see me clamoring for Pittsburgh to go with West Virginia. Besides that foray didn't turn out so well. And when the Confederacy invaded New Mexico they did so for an easy Homecoming opponent.

The Rebels wanted Cuba too. How about the University of Havana?

Saint Francis University is in PA and we would love to join the SEC! 04-cheers


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - He1nousOne - 12-06-2014 05:10 PM

(12-06-2014 04:01 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 03:16 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 03:04 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:10 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:00 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  How can you add Cincinnati to South Eastern Conference when the when the program is located in a completely different geographic location?

Because Missouri and Texas just screams Southeastern. 03-lmfao

anything west of Texas would be pushing it

The Houston area of Texas could probably be considered more Southeastern in culture than Southwestern thus why The Aggies fit.

Anything west of that though, definitely Southwest not Southeast. Texas is far too large and far too diverse to make the statement that you did.

I do agree with you that the best bet for the SEC would be Texas and Oklahoma, that is a no brainer and would be the case for any conference.

My question to you though would be whether or not you actually believe that could happen?

I personally am under the impression that Texas believes that staying put where they are is the most financially lucrative option, that being said I still believe that the lore of the SEC power is too much to resist

Then I don't think you understand just how big of a pill it would be for Longhorn Ego's to swallow in terms of them being seen as following The Aggies. No way, sorry.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - He1nousOne - 12-06-2014 05:13 PM

(12-06-2014 03:43 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 03:04 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:10 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:00 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(07-06-2013 10:21 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  I would add Oklahoma for sure. But I would add Cincinnati before I added anyone else. The potential market is just to great to pass up.

How can you add Cincinnati to South Eastern Conference when the when the program is located in a completely different geographic location?

Because Missouri and Texas just screams Southeastern. 03-lmfao

anything west of Texas would be pushing it

Well, the Confederacy did invade New Mexico. How about New Mexico State? 04-cheers

(12-06-2014 03:16 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 03:04 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:10 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:00 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  How can you add Cincinnati to South Eastern Conference when the when the program is located in a completely different geographic location?

Because Missouri and Texas just screams Southeastern. 03-lmfao

anything west of Texas would be pushing it

The Houston area of Texas could probably be considered more Southeastern in culture than Southwestern thus why The Aggies fit.

Anything west of that though, definitely Southwest not Southeast. Texas is far too large and far too diverse to make the statement that you did.

I do agree with you that the best bet for the SEC would be Texas and Oklahoma, that is a no brainer and would be the case for any conference.

My question to you though would be whether or not you actually believe that could happen?


As you said, culture doesn't always recognize geography. I cannot see Texas giving up its kingdom in the BIG 12 for a fiefdom in the SEC. Even the deposed emperors of the Latin Empire begged across Europe and sold holy relics to regain their kingdom instead of settling for a principality.

But with the ACC, Texas would still maintain complete control of scheduling 6-7 of their regular season games. They would still be able to play all the Big 12 teams that they actually care about while at the same time getting out of the Midwest and moving into more lucrative markets.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 12-06-2014 05:13 PM

(12-06-2014 05:02 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 04:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 03:43 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 03:04 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 02:10 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  Because Missouri and Texas just screams Southeastern. 03-lmfao

anything west of Texas would be pushing it

Well, the Confederacy did invade New Mexico. How about New Mexico State? 04-cheers

(12-06-2014 03:16 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(12-06-2014 03:04 PM)completely_bias Wrote:  anything west of Texas would be pushing it

The Houston area of Texas could probably be considered more Southeastern in culture than Southwestern thus why The Aggies fit.

Anything west of that though, definitely Southwest not Southeast. Texas is far too large and far too diverse to make the statement that you did.

I do agree with you that the best bet for the SEC would be Texas and Oklahoma, that is a no brainer and would be the case for any conference.

My question to you though would be whether or not you actually believe that could happen?


As you said, culture doesn't always recognize geography. I cannot see Texas giving up its kingdom in the BIG 12 for a fiefdom in the SEC. Even the deposed emperors of the Latin Empire begged across Europe and sold holy relics to regain their kingdom instead of settling for a principality.

The Confederacy invaded Pennsylvania too, but you don't see me clamoring for Pittsburgh to go with West Virginia. Besides that foray didn't turn out so well. And when the Confederacy invaded New Mexico they did so for an easy Homecoming opponent.

The Rebels wanted Cuba too. How about the University of Havana?

Saint Francis University is in PA and we would love to join the SEC! 04-cheers

The SEC has been to Cuba. Auburn tied Villanova in the Bacardi Rumba Bowl in the years (30's) that led to Havana being a prime tourist destination for wealthier Southerners. I actually knew people that went there every Summer. They were a part of a progressive undercurrent of society that sought to escape the prying eyes of the austere Bible belt so that they could party hardy and return to their saintly pews back home without fear that the two worlds would collide. Danged Communists stopped all of that!

And just to show you that I'm a fair minded person it was the Braves organization that led to the rise of Fidel Castro. He had sought a position in the Braves organization (even minor leagues) prior to returning rejected to Cuba to lead the revolution. The danged Braves have never known who to sign and who to pass on. I felt for many years that when the Expos folded that we needed to relocate them to Havana. I think if he had gotten a major league franchise of his own Fidel might have been willing to embrace the West and who knows Havana might have once again become what it was prior to Fidel and the rise of Las Vegas.