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? - JRsec - 05-03-2018 03:31 PM

(05-03-2018 01:10 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  Kansas State has been scheduling fb series with SEC schools, including Vandy and Mississippi State. Unlike Kansas, KSU has reached out to Mizzou for future game possibilities. KSU is also scheduling some with the PAC.

KSU definitely wants connections if/when the Big12 has future depletions. In some interesting scenarios, KSU could be a default # 16. Oklahoma State and Kansas State may not sound charming, but if OU and UT are off the table, and a major conference is still looking to expand, they'd at least get a look.

Together Oklahoma State and Kansas State add 6 million potential viewers for a rapidly becoming obsolete pay model. Both are well below the SEC's mean attendance, and both are below the SEC's mean Gross Revenue by over 30 million. Neither could add enough value on their own to merit inclusion. This would be especially true in a content driven pay model where national reach factors in more heavily than regional reach.

The simple reality is that the only schools left that can add to the bottom line of the SEC in a demonstrable way and are potentially contiguous would be:

1. Texas
2. Ohio State
3. Michigan
4. Oklahoma
5. Notre Dame
6. Florida State

North Carolina and Virginia Tech would be on down the list and questionable as to content value delivered for football.

Since I don't think that Ohio State or Michigan are viable and since I have profound reservations that Notre Dame would consider the SEC as a potential home, that leaves Texas, Oklahoma, and Florida State and of those even Florida State's ability to earn every SEC member more, even in a content driven model, would be marginal at best.

The thing is that either Texas or Oklahoma add enough value to cover one lesser addition.

If the SEC misses out on Texas and Oklahoma I seriously doubt we would add anyone. And even if the addition being considered was Texas or Oklahoma plus 1 there would be earnest debate over the plus one before we settled on Oklahoma State or Texas Tech, although the value added would likely result in a final vote to add them.

I like Iowa State and Kansas State because they fit with the engineering and mechanical and agricultural bent of many SEC schools. But no matter how much I, or others, may like them they don't add to the bottom line of the SEC's athletic departments. Neither would West Virginia, T.C.U. (who is an interesting case solely because of the DFW market), Oklahoma State, Baylor, or Texas Tech. Even Kansas would be a very hard sell.

So I don't see any move that doesn't have as #15 either Texas, or Oklahoma being viable.

If we miss out on them then maybe in 2036 we might show an interest in F.S.U. plus either a North Carolina School, Virginia Tech, or Clemson, maybe!


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 05-03-2018 09:36 PM

An interesting tweet out of Kansas Finance Manager Baty today. He said their donors had to really step it up for the football program because the Jayhawks needed to position themselves for the coming realignment.

It's significant for two reasons.

1. It's a University official still talking about the coming realignment and that's a first for this off season.

2. Kansas is very aware of their precarious situation with regards to being of value to another P5 conference.

http://www2.kusports.com/weblogs/keegan-lunch-break/2018/may/3/williams-fund-boss-matt-baty-instructs-k/


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - murrdcu - 05-03-2018 10:03 PM

(05-03-2018 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  An interesting tweet out of Kansas Financial Manager Baty today. He said their donors had to really step it up for the football program because the Jayhawks needed to position themselves for the coming realignment.

It's significant for two reasons.

1. It's a University official still talking about the coming realignment and that's a first for this off season.

2. Kansas is very aware of their precarious situation with regards to being of value to another P5 conference.

Finally some actual realignment acknowledgement from important players.

I still think Kansas’ best shot at another P5 conference is in the Big Ten or wherever Missouri is. Kansas matches the Big Ten core values while Mizzou could easily recommend them for invitation should the sec need another school to round out the numbers.

Anyway, I hope we hear some leaks from what the sec is thinking or looking at.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - BePcr07 - 05-03-2018 10:11 PM

(05-03-2018 10:03 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  An interesting tweet out of Kansas Financial Manager Baty today. He said their donors had to really step it up for the football program because the Jayhawks needed to position themselves for the coming realignment.

It's significant for two reasons.

1. It's a University official still talking about the coming realignment and that's a first for this off season.

2. Kansas is very aware of their precarious situation with regards to being of value to another P5 conference.

Finally some actual realignment acknowledgement from important players.

I still think Kansas’ best shot at another P5 conference is in the Big Ten or wherever Missouri is. Kansas matches the Big Ten core values while Mizzou could easily recommend them for invitation should the sec need another school to round out the numbers.

Anyway, I hope we hear some leaks from what the sec is thinking or looking at.

The ACC might be a stretch but any power conference would take Kansas. Their basketball is one of the few programs that can carry the school. Growing in football would only make the Jayhawks that much more attractive. Personally, I would like to see Kansas in the SEC. It would match them back with Missouri, likely help advance their football program, give the SEC another basketball blueblood, and provide another AAU school to the SEC.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 05-03-2018 10:11 PM

(05-03-2018 10:03 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  An interesting tweet out of Kansas Financial Manager Baty today. He said their donors had to really step it up for the football program because the Jayhawks needed to position themselves for the coming realignment.

It's significant for two reasons.

1. It's a University official still talking about the coming realignment and that's a first for this off season.

2. Kansas is very aware of their precarious situation with regards to being of value to another P5 conference.

Finally some actual realignment acknowledgement from important players.

I still think Kansas’ best shot at another P5 conference is in the Big Ten or wherever Missouri is. Kansas matches the Big Ten core values while Mizzou could easily recommend them for invitation should the sec need another school to round out the numbers.

Anyway, I hope we hear some leaks from what the sec is thinking or looking at.

I think leaks will be few and far between this time. The networks have too much at stake to risk minor personalities screwing up their plans like some in the ACC did in 2010.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 05-03-2018 10:24 PM

(05-03-2018 10:11 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 10:03 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  An interesting tweet out of Kansas Financial Manager Baty today. He said their donors had to really step it up for the football program because the Jayhawks needed to position themselves for the coming realignment.

It's significant for two reasons.

1. It's a University official still talking about the coming realignment and that's a first for this off season.

2. Kansas is very aware of their precarious situation with regards to being of value to another P5 conference.

Finally some actual realignment acknowledgement from important players.

I still think Kansas’ best shot at another P5 conference is in the Big Ten or wherever Missouri is. Kansas matches the Big Ten core values while Mizzou could easily recommend them for invitation should the sec need another school to round out the numbers.

Anyway, I hope we hear some leaks from what the sec is thinking or looking at.

The ACC might be a stretch but any power conference would take Kansas. Their basketball is one of the few programs that can carry the school. Growing in football would only make the Jayhawks that much more attractive. Personally, I would like to see Kansas in the SEC. It would match them back with Missouri, likely help advance their football program, give the SEC another basketball blueblood, and provide another AAU school to the SEC.

Next year the SEC will be paying out between 45-46 million. We get an annual escalation on our contract of around 2 million plus and we will have Sugar Bowl money back next year which is another 3 million.

The issue here is that the total value of Kansas Basketball (which is 20% of their total value to any conference since football is 80% of it) is nowhere large enough to pay their way into the Big 10 at 51.1 million, nor is it anywhere close enough to pay their way into the SEC at 45-46 million. Kansas has to make enough on Basketball to equal the buy in value for a conference, and then to pay each member there at least 2 million more to be worth taking them. So that's 51 million plus 28 million more for the Big 10 and 46 million plus 28 million more for the SEC.

The could get in either conference as a second school to either Oklahoma or Texas. The only problem is Oklahoma is sure to want to take care of OSU and Texas will want another Texas school involved. That means that Kansas's prospects stink for either the Big 10 or SEC and that really the only viable place they could land is in an expanding PAC 12. Kansas would be an enormous outlier to the ACC, a conference rich in hoops and striving to gain more football credibility. So no, Kansas is not viable to the ACC either.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - Transic_nyc - 05-03-2018 11:06 PM

(05-02-2018 03:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  A poster on another site that I chat with says that the PAC has disbanded in the past and reorganized itself minus members. He suggests that the PAC could do this again dropping Washington State and Oregon State and adding Kansas and he suggested Texas Tech.

So in a move to P4 we could see something like this:

Big 10:
West: Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

East: Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

SEC:
East: Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

West: Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

ACC:
North: Boston College, Louisville, N.C. State, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh Syracuse, Virginia Tech

South: Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia

PAC:
West: Arizona, California, Colorado, Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Utah

East: Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Kansas, Oklahoma, Southern Cal, Texas, Texas Tech

*Wake Forest would be fully included in all ACC sports except football.

So the new P4 would be a champs only for 56 schools. That increases bowl payouts and CFP money for everyone involved.

Out and into an enhanced G5 would be Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Baylor, West Virginia and T.C.U. from the Big 12, Wake Forest from the ACC, and Oregon State and Washington State from the PAC.

Those 9 plus Boise State, Brigham Young, San Diego State, and Air Force would be well on their way to establishing another conference like the AAC which would serve as a true buffer against the lower tier FBS. We could be looking at two conferences that distinguish themselves from the rest. They certainly would have more value for TV contract purposes than the others.

If the hope is that Kansas, Texas and Oklahoma stick together then either they figure out a way to keep the Big XII viable or find a way to the Pac-12. They and West Virginia are the only flagship schools left.

Other than that, I do agree that in the case both the Big Ten and SEC stay put that divisions may have to be reworked. Tough part will be the necessary crossover games to account for in-conference rivalries and how they would be worked in the schedules in the future.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 05-03-2018 11:15 PM

(05-03-2018 11:06 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(05-02-2018 03:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  A poster on another site that I chat with says that the PAC has disbanded in the past and reorganized itself minus members. He suggests that the PAC could do this again dropping Washington State and Oregon State and adding Kansas and he suggested Texas Tech.

So in a move to P4 we could see something like this:

Big 10:
West: Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

East: Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

SEC:
East: Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

West: Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

ACC:
North: Boston College, Louisville, N.C. State, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh Syracuse, Virginia Tech

South: Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia

PAC:
West: Arizona, California, Colorado, Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Utah

East: Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Kansas, Oklahoma, Southern Cal, Texas, Texas Tech

*Wake Forest would be fully included in all ACC sports except football.

So the new P4 would be a champs only for 56 schools. That increases bowl payouts and CFP money for everyone involved.

Out and into an enhanced G5 would be Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Baylor, West Virginia and T.C.U. from the Big 12, Wake Forest from the ACC, and Oregon State and Washington State from the PAC.

Those 9 plus Boise State, Brigham Young, San Diego State, and Air Force would be well on their way to establishing another conference like the AAC which would serve as a true buffer against the lower tier FBS. We could be looking at two conferences that distinguish themselves from the rest. They certainly would have more value for TV contract purposes than the others.

If the hope is that Kansas, Texas and Oklahoma stick together then either they figure out a way to keep the Big XII viable or find a way to the Pac-12. They and West Virginia are the only flagship schools left.

Other than that, I do agree that in the case both the Big Ten and SEC stay put that divisions may have to be reworked. Tough part will be the necessary crossover games to account for in-conference rivalries and how they would be worked in the schedules in the future.

I'm thinking that somewhere between the end of the 1st 1/3rd of the season and the halfway point is the time slot for those rivalries that cross divisional lines. That way should both win out the rematch in the CCG will be fresh again, and pertinent.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - Transic_nyc - 05-04-2018 12:15 AM

(05-03-2018 11:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 11:06 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(05-02-2018 03:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  A poster on another site that I chat with says that the PAC has disbanded in the past and reorganized itself minus members. He suggests that the PAC could do this again dropping Washington State and Oregon State and adding Kansas and he suggested Texas Tech.

So in a move to P4 we could see something like this:

Big 10:
West: Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

East: Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

SEC:
East: Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

West: Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

ACC:
North: Boston College, Louisville, N.C. State, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh Syracuse, Virginia Tech

South: Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia

PAC:
West: Arizona, California, Colorado, Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Utah

East: Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Kansas, Oklahoma, Southern Cal, Texas, Texas Tech

*Wake Forest would be fully included in all ACC sports except football.

So the new P4 would be a champs only for 56 schools. That increases bowl payouts and CFP money for everyone involved.

Out and into an enhanced G5 would be Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Baylor, West Virginia and T.C.U. from the Big 12, Wake Forest from the ACC, and Oregon State and Washington State from the PAC.

Those 9 plus Boise State, Brigham Young, San Diego State, and Air Force would be well on their way to establishing another conference like the AAC which would serve as a true buffer against the lower tier FBS. We could be looking at two conferences that distinguish themselves from the rest. They certainly would have more value for TV contract purposes than the others.

If the hope is that Kansas, Texas and Oklahoma stick together then either they figure out a way to keep the Big XII viable or find a way to the Pac-12. They and West Virginia are the only flagship schools left.

Other than that, I do agree that in the case both the Big Ten and SEC stay put that divisions may have to be reworked. Tough part will be the necessary crossover games to account for in-conference rivalries and how they would be worked in the schedules in the future.

I'm thinking that somewhere between the end of the 1st 1/3rd of the season and the halfway point is the time slot for those rivalries that cross divisional lines. That way should both win out the rematch in the CCG will be fresh again, and pertinent.

Some of the more famous rivalries happen at the end of the regular season. It will be quite an adjustment to play Auburn-Alabama or Ohio State-Michigan before the halfway point. Perhaps shifting Michigan-Michigan State and Ohio State-Penn State to the end of the season could mitigate some of the impact.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 05-04-2018 12:56 AM

(05-04-2018 12:15 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 11:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 11:06 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  
(05-02-2018 03:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  A poster on another site that I chat with says that the PAC has disbanded in the past and reorganized itself minus members. He suggests that the PAC could do this again dropping Washington State and Oregon State and adding Kansas and he suggested Texas Tech.

So in a move to P4 we could see something like this:

Big 10:
West: Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

East: Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

SEC:
East: Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

West: Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

ACC:
North: Boston College, Louisville, N.C. State, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh Syracuse, Virginia Tech

South: Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia

PAC:
West: Arizona, California, Colorado, Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Utah

East: Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Kansas, Oklahoma, Southern Cal, Texas, Texas Tech

*Wake Forest would be fully included in all ACC sports except football.

So the new P4 would be a champs only for 56 schools. That increases bowl payouts and CFP money for everyone involved.

Out and into an enhanced G5 would be Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Baylor, West Virginia and T.C.U. from the Big 12, Wake Forest from the ACC, and Oregon State and Washington State from the PAC.

Those 9 plus Boise State, Brigham Young, San Diego State, and Air Force would be well on their way to establishing another conference like the AAC which would serve as a true buffer against the lower tier FBS. We could be looking at two conferences that distinguish themselves from the rest. They certainly would have more value for TV contract purposes than the others.

If the hope is that Kansas, Texas and Oklahoma stick together then either they figure out a way to keep the Big XII viable or find a way to the Pac-12. They and West Virginia are the only flagship schools left.

Other than that, I do agree that in the case both the Big Ten and SEC stay put that divisions may have to be reworked. Tough part will be the necessary crossover games to account for in-conference rivalries and how they would be worked in the schedules in the future.

I'm thinking that somewhere between the end of the 1st 1/3rd of the season and the halfway point is the time slot for those rivalries that cross divisional lines. That way should both win out the rematch in the CCG will be fresh again, and pertinent.

Some of the more famous rivalries happen at the end of the regular season. It will be quite an adjustment to play Auburn-Alabama or Ohio State-Michigan before the halfway point. Perhaps shifting Michigan-Michigan State and Ohio State-Penn State to the end of the season could mitigate some of the impact.

I get that. But too many times the OSU/Mich game and the Aub/Ala game are eliminator games. Those are great brands and we shouldn't let two of them die late every year. The games will still be rivalries and still be intensely watched if they are played earlier, only all 4 brands then have recovery time should they lose to their arch rival. I think the division alignment might be the perfect excuse to handle that situation.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - XLance - 05-04-2018 04:34 AM

(05-03-2018 10:03 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  An interesting tweet out of Kansas Financial Manager Baty today. He said their donors had to really step it up for the football program because the Jayhawks needed to position themselves for the coming realignment.

It's significant for two reasons.

1. It's a University official still talking about the coming realignment and that's a first for this off season.

2. Kansas is very aware of their precarious situation with regards to being of value to another P5 conference.

Finally some actual realignment acknowledgement from important players.

I still think Kansas’ best shot at another P5 conference is in the Big Ten or wherever Missouri is. Kansas matches the Big Ten core values while Mizzou could easily recommend them for invitation should the sec need another school to round out the numbers.

Anyway, I hope we hear some leaks from what the sec is thinking or looking at.

Kansas' best opportunity to remain in a P conference will be the PAC. Why? The PAC needs a basketball power to help get their league some recognition and serve a a bell cow to lead the PAC back to prominence in basketball.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 05-04-2018 01:17 PM

(05-03-2018 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  An interesting tweet out of Kansas Finance Manager Baty today. He said their donors had to really step it up for the football program because the Jayhawks needed to position themselves for the coming realignment.

It's significant for two reasons.

1. It's a University official still talking about the coming realignment and that's a first for this off season.

2. Kansas is very aware of their precarious situation with regards to being of value to another P5 conference.

http://www2.kusports.com/weblogs/keegan-lunch-break/2018/may/3/williams-fund-boss-matt-baty-instructs-k/

This actual news kind of got bypassed by older conversations so I'm bumping it back to the new page.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - XLance - 05-04-2018 03:44 PM

(05-04-2018 01:17 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  An interesting tweet out of Kansas Finance Manager Baty today. He said their donors had to really step it up for the football program because the Jayhawks needed to position themselves for the coming realignment.

It's significant for two reasons.

1. It's a University official still talking about the coming realignment and that's a first for this off season.

2. Kansas is very aware of their precarious situation with regards to being of value to another P5 conference.

http://www2.kusports.com/weblogs/keegan-lunch-break/2018/may/3/williams-fund-boss-matt-baty-instructs-k/

This actual news kind of got bypassed by older conversations so I'm bumping it back to the new page.

What we can surmise:

The Big 12 is going away.

Kansas is NOT guaranteed a safe landing spot
(since we know that Kansas is probably #3 in value in the Big 12, that means that NO SCHOOLS other than Tejas and Oklahoma are secure in finding a P home)


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - AllTideUp - 05-04-2018 04:32 PM

(05-03-2018 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  An interesting tweet out of Kansas Finance Manager Baty today. He said their donors had to really step it up for the football program because the Jayhawks needed to position themselves for the coming realignment.

It's significant for two reasons.

1. It's a University official still talking about the coming realignment and that's a first for this off season.

2. Kansas is very aware of their precarious situation with regards to being of value to another P5 conference.

http://www2.kusports.com/weblogs/keegan-lunch-break/2018/may/3/williams-fund-boss-matt-baty-instructs-k/

That guy is taking a poor approach to fundraising although that may be a sign that there's some degree of desperation within the administration.

My opinion has been that ESPN is going to ultimately rescue Kansas. They have a national fan base and the network is going to want/need as much content as they can get especially in the age of ESPN+.

If KU can prove themselves as a halfway decent attraction in football then I think ESPN has no problem pulling the trigger. Technically, KU won't be worth the money to the B1G or the SEC, but they would likely be worth the money to ESPN so I think they wouldn't have a problem overpaying for them a little.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 05-04-2018 04:32 PM

(05-04-2018 03:44 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(05-04-2018 01:17 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  An interesting tweet out of Kansas Finance Manager Baty today. He said their donors had to really step it up for the football program because the Jayhawks needed to position themselves for the coming realignment.

It's significant for two reasons.

1. It's a University official still talking about the coming realignment and that's a first for this off season.

2. Kansas is very aware of their precarious situation with regards to being of value to another P5 conference.

http://www2.kusports.com/weblogs/keegan-lunch-break/2018/may/3/williams-fund-boss-matt-baty-instructs-k/

This actual news kind of got bypassed by older conversations so I'm bumping it back to the new page.

What we can surmise:

The Big 12 is going away.

Kansas is NOT guaranteed a safe landing spot
(since we know that Kansas is probably #3 in value in the Big 12, that means that NO SCHOOLS other than Tejas and Oklahoma are secure in finding a P home)

I agree with your conclusion but it may surprise you to know that Kansas was #4 in value in the Big 12 for 2016-7 which is the latest data we have. T.C.U. was #3. Surprised?

BTW: #5 was Baylor, West Virginia was #6, and Oklahoma State was #7 followed by KState, Texas Tech, and Iowa State.

But that's just revenue. The long and the short of it is that only Texas and/or Oklahoma add to the SEC's value. They are at or above our means in every category.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - XLance - 05-04-2018 08:26 PM

(05-04-2018 04:32 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  An interesting tweet out of Kansas Finance Manager Baty today. He said their donors had to really step it up for the football program because the Jayhawks needed to position themselves for the coming realignment.

It's significant for two reasons.

1. It's a University official still talking about the coming realignment and that's a first for this off season.

2. Kansas is very aware of their precarious situation with regards to being of value to another P5 conference.

http://www2.kusports.com/weblogs/keegan-lunch-break/2018/may/3/williams-fund-boss-matt-baty-instructs-k/

That guy is taking a poor approach to fundraising although that may be a sign that there's some degree of desperation within the administration.

My opinion has been that ESPN is going to ultimately rescue Kansas. They have a national fan base and the network is going to want/need as much content as they can get especially in the age of ESPN+.

If KU can prove themselves as a halfway decent attraction in football then I think ESPN has no problem pulling the trigger. Technically, KU won't be worth the money to the B1G or the SEC, but they would likely be worth the money to ESPN so I think they wouldn't have a problem overpaying for them a little.

He is probably very frustrated.
Kansas officials know what they need to do, but there are no guarantees and $350 Million is a lot to spend no matter which level of conference (G or P ) Kansas will find itself in in the next few years..

http://www.kansan.com/sports/weekly-debate-should-kansas-go-ahead-with-memorial-stadium-renovations/article_c8a019be-06ab-11e8-8e55-c3047a14e82d.html

With many projecting the next big wave of conference realignment to begin in 2023, that will allow Kansas football to include their completely new renovations — with a five year projection — on their resume.

Instead of being left in the dust with the possibility of other Big 12 members departing, Kansas can thus be allowed to lead the pack and make the decisive move.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 05-04-2018 08:46 PM

(05-04-2018 08:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(05-04-2018 04:32 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  An interesting tweet out of Kansas Finance Manager Baty today. He said their donors had to really step it up for the football program because the Jayhawks needed to position themselves for the coming realignment.

It's significant for two reasons.

1. It's a University official still talking about the coming realignment and that's a first for this off season.

2. Kansas is very aware of their precarious situation with regards to being of value to another P5 conference.

http://www2.kusports.com/weblogs/keegan-lunch-break/2018/may/3/williams-fund-boss-matt-baty-instructs-k/

That guy is taking a poor approach to fundraising although that may be a sign that there's some degree of desperation within the administration.

My opinion has been that ESPN is going to ultimately rescue Kansas. They have a national fan base and the network is going to want/need as much content as they can get especially in the age of ESPN+.

If KU can prove themselves as a halfway decent attraction in football then I think ESPN has no problem pulling the trigger. Technically, KU won't be worth the money to the B1G or the SEC, but they would likely be worth the money to ESPN so I think they wouldn't have a problem overpaying for them a little.

He is probably very frustrated.
Kansas officials know what they need to do, but there are no guarantees and $350 Million is a lot to spend no matter which level of conference (G or P ) Kansas will find itself in in the next few years..

http://www.kansan.com/sports/weekly-debate-should-kansas-go-ahead-with-memorial-stadium-renovations/article_c8a019be-06ab-11e8-8e55-c3047a14e82d.html

With many projecting the next big wave of conference realignment to begin in 2023, that will allow Kansas football to include their completely new renovations — with a five year projection — on their resume.

Instead of being left in the dust with the possibility of other Big 12 members departing, Kansas can thus be allowed to lead the pack and make the decisive move.

I'm just thinking out loud here and am not making a definitive statement, but......

If Kansas wanted to head to the Big 10 with Oklahoma do you think for a minute that they would be concerned about football stadium renovations? Seriously look at Maryland, Rutgers, Purdue, Indiana, Northwestern etc. I don't think the Big 10 has made that big a deal over facilities.

That's certainly not the case for the PAC either. And as far as the ACC goes the venues range from on campus to off campus to professional sports stadiums. I don't see the ACC making a big deal about football facilities.

So what leaves me a bit puzzled here is that only the SEC has stadium and luxury box standards that we seek from member schools. So why would Kansas throw 350 million at a football stadium and indoor practice facilities? Only in the SEC does every member school have indoor practice facilities. Only in the SEC would they need to prove their investment in football?

Is it just me or has anyone else considered the peculiar nature of this?

Might the pairing that ESPN seeks be Oklahoma and Kansas to the SEC?

Could Fox be getting dibs on Oklahoma and perhaps it is Texas and Kansas that ESPN has in mind as a pairing?

As conservative as Kansas has been financially, has it occurred to anyone else but me that they would not be investing 350 million into the football facilities if they didn't have some kind of guarantee in return on that money?

What if Oklahoma leaves with Iowa State to head to the Big 10 (with OU under T3 obligation to FOX)?

What if the SEC is looking to get Texas and Kansas (both under T3 obligation to ESPN).

What if the TV execs have decided to reunite OU with Nebraska, UT with A&M and KU with Mizzou?

What if the Big 10's home run duo is Notre Dame or Virginia Tech and Oklahoma? And what if ESPN sees Texas and Texas Tech as a pair to take the ACC to 16 and what if maybe T.C.U. and Kansas are intended for the SEC?

There are just so many different possibilities if Kansas is in preparation for the SEC?

But my best guess would be (if the networks hold form) Texas and Kansas to the SEC. Oklahoma to the Big 10 with a mystery school. Why? It would give Texas everything they could hope for in a move. They relegate the Sooners to a choice that will handicap things to Texas's advantage in the RRR, joining the SEC reunites Texas with Arkansas, Texas A&M, Missouri and Kansas, and nullifies any advantage that the Aggies gained by joining the SEC without them. And it makes them the star of a division in which the schedule really appeals to their fan base. And it relegates T.C.U., Baylor, and Texas Tech back to an inferior position within the state. And, Kansas is no threat to them and would probably vote with them.

I'm not saying that any of this adds up or will happen. But I do have some relevant questions circulating in my head right now. Thoughts?


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - AllTideUp - 05-05-2018 01:23 AM

(05-04-2018 08:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(05-04-2018 08:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(05-04-2018 04:32 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  An interesting tweet out of Kansas Finance Manager Baty today. He said their donors had to really step it up for the football program because the Jayhawks needed to position themselves for the coming realignment.

It's significant for two reasons.

1. It's a University official still talking about the coming realignment and that's a first for this off season.

2. Kansas is very aware of their precarious situation with regards to being of value to another P5 conference.

http://www2.kusports.com/weblogs/keegan-lunch-break/2018/may/3/williams-fund-boss-matt-baty-instructs-k/

That guy is taking a poor approach to fundraising although that may be a sign that there's some degree of desperation within the administration.

My opinion has been that ESPN is going to ultimately rescue Kansas. They have a national fan base and the network is going to want/need as much content as they can get especially in the age of ESPN+.

If KU can prove themselves as a halfway decent attraction in football then I think ESPN has no problem pulling the trigger. Technically, KU won't be worth the money to the B1G or the SEC, but they would likely be worth the money to ESPN so I think they wouldn't have a problem overpaying for them a little.

He is probably very frustrated.
Kansas officials know what they need to do, but there are no guarantees and $350 Million is a lot to spend no matter which level of conference (G or P ) Kansas will find itself in in the next few years..

http://www.kansan.com/sports/weekly-debate-should-kansas-go-ahead-with-memorial-stadium-renovations/article_c8a019be-06ab-11e8-8e55-c3047a14e82d.html

With many projecting the next big wave of conference realignment to begin in 2023, that will allow Kansas football to include their completely new renovations — with a five year projection — on their resume.

Instead of being left in the dust with the possibility of other Big 12 members departing, Kansas can thus be allowed to lead the pack and make the decisive move.

So what leaves me a bit puzzled here is that only the SEC has stadium and luxury box standards that we seek from member schools. So why would Kansas throw 350 million at a football stadium and indoor practice facilities? Only in the SEC does every member school have indoor practice facilities. Only in the SEC would they need to prove their investment in football?

Is it just me or has anyone else considered the peculiar nature of this?

It's not just you. My thought would be that someone, somewhere has told Kansas that they need to step their game up.

I can only think of two reasons why a school would agree to spend that much money on a project.

1. They've been guaranteed it will pay off and they just need to make a good faith effort.

2. They've been told they have no shot unless they do something drastic.

I tend to think it's the former in KU's situation because they are not without stature...flagship school, national fan base with an elite basketball brand, and they proved in the Mangino days that they can have a pulse if they put their mind to it.

I believe it was Sankey who said a while back that we should look to our previous additions to get a clue on what our approach would be for the next round. He mentioned AAU schools and contiguous states. Well, we're not getting any ACC schools so Kansas fits that stated criteria about as well as anyone.

I hadn't really thought about it from the angle of luxury seating and amenities, but you're right about that...the SEC is going to put more emphasis on that than anyone else.

It was an unnamed Kansas official who was quoted a few years back as saying the SEC would be an ideal landing spot. An unnamed SEC official was quoted in the same article saying that wasn't a direction they thought they would go in, but he didn't say "never" or "no interest." Missouri was a bridge into the region and Kansas secures a pretty significant slice of that region. They are the yin and yang, if you will, of that part of the country.

But yes, it's always made more sense to me that Kansas would drop that kind of money on football to get the attention of the SEC rather than necessarily to appease anyone else.

And it's always made more sense to me that a conservative state that was centered more around life in small cities and small towns as opposed to metropolitan mega centers while also being the sort of place that is passionate about local college athletics would be a better fit in the SEC as opposed to the B1G regardless of any Midwestern flavor.


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - JRsec - 05-05-2018 01:29 AM

(05-05-2018 01:23 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(05-04-2018 08:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(05-04-2018 08:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(05-04-2018 04:32 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  An interesting tweet out of Kansas Finance Manager Baty today. He said their donors had to really step it up for the football program because the Jayhawks needed to position themselves for the coming realignment.

It's significant for two reasons.

1. It's a University official still talking about the coming realignment and that's a first for this off season.

2. Kansas is very aware of their precarious situation with regards to being of value to another P5 conference.

http://www2.kusports.com/weblogs/keegan-lunch-break/2018/may/3/williams-fund-boss-matt-baty-instructs-k/

That guy is taking a poor approach to fundraising although that may be a sign that there's some degree of desperation within the administration.

My opinion has been that ESPN is going to ultimately rescue Kansas. They have a national fan base and the network is going to want/need as much content as they can get especially in the age of ESPN+.

If KU can prove themselves as a halfway decent attraction in football then I think ESPN has no problem pulling the trigger. Technically, KU won't be worth the money to the B1G or the SEC, but they would likely be worth the money to ESPN so I think they wouldn't have a problem overpaying for them a little.

He is probably very frustrated.
Kansas officials know what they need to do, but there are no guarantees and $350 Million is a lot to spend no matter which level of conference (G or P ) Kansas will find itself in in the next few years..

http://www.kansan.com/sports/weekly-debate-should-kansas-go-ahead-with-memorial-stadium-renovations/article_c8a019be-06ab-11e8-8e55-c3047a14e82d.html

With many projecting the next big wave of conference realignment to begin in 2023, that will allow Kansas football to include their completely new renovations — with a five year projection — on their resume.

Instead of being left in the dust with the possibility of other Big 12 members departing, Kansas can thus be allowed to lead the pack and make the decisive move.

So what leaves me a bit puzzled here is that only the SEC has stadium and luxury box standards that we seek from member schools. So why would Kansas throw 350 million at a football stadium and indoor practice facilities? Only in the SEC does every member school have indoor practice facilities. Only in the SEC would they need to prove their investment in football?

Is it just me or has anyone else considered the peculiar nature of this?

It's not just you. My thought would be that someone, somewhere has told Kansas that they need to step their game up.

I can only think of two reasons why a school would agree to spend that much money on a project.

1. They've been guaranteed it will pay off and they just need to make a good faith effort.

2. They've been told they have no shot unless they do something drastic.

I tend to think it's the former in KU's situation because they are not without stature...flagship school, national fan base with an elite basketball brand, and they proved in the Mangino days that they can have a pulse if they put their mind to it.

I believe it was Sankey who said a while back that we should look to our previous additions to get a clue on what our approach would be for the next round. He mentioned AAU schools and contiguous states. Well, we're not getting any ACC schools so Kansas fits that stated criteria about as well as anyone.

I hadn't really thought about it from the angle of luxury seating and amenities, but you're right about that...the SEC is going to put more emphasis on that than anyone else.

It was an unnamed Kansas official who was quoted a few years back as saying the SEC would be an ideal landing spot. An unnamed SEC official was quoted in the same article saying that wasn't a direction they thought they would go in, but he didn't say "never" or "no interest." Missouri was a bridge into the region and Kansas secures a pretty significant slice of that region. They are the yin and yang, if you will, of that part of the country.

But yes, it's always made more sense to me that Kansas would drop that kind of money on football to get the attention of the SEC rather than necessarily to appease anyone else.

And it's always made more sense to me that a conservative state that was centered more around life in small cities and small towns as opposed to metropolitan mega centers while also being the sort of place that is passionate about local college athletics would be a better fit in the SEC as opposed to the B1G regardless of any Midwestern flavor.

Alright, we are in agreement on reasoning. So the next question is straight forward. Who comes with them?


RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why? - AllTideUp - 05-05-2018 01:39 AM

(05-05-2018 01:29 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(05-05-2018 01:23 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  
(05-04-2018 08:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(05-04-2018 08:26 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(05-04-2018 04:32 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  That guy is taking a poor approach to fundraising although that may be a sign that there's some degree of desperation within the administration.

My opinion has been that ESPN is going to ultimately rescue Kansas. They have a national fan base and the network is going to want/need as much content as they can get especially in the age of ESPN+.

If KU can prove themselves as a halfway decent attraction in football then I think ESPN has no problem pulling the trigger. Technically, KU won't be worth the money to the B1G or the SEC, but they would likely be worth the money to ESPN so I think they wouldn't have a problem overpaying for them a little.

He is probably very frustrated.
Kansas officials know what they need to do, but there are no guarantees and $350 Million is a lot to spend no matter which level of conference (G or P ) Kansas will find itself in in the next few years..

http://www.kansan.com/sports/weekly-debate-should-kansas-go-ahead-with-memorial-stadium-renovations/article_c8a019be-06ab-11e8-8e55-c3047a14e82d.html

With many projecting the next big wave of conference realignment to begin in 2023, that will allow Kansas football to include their completely new renovations — with a five year projection — on their resume.

Instead of being left in the dust with the possibility of other Big 12 members departing, Kansas can thus be allowed to lead the pack and make the decisive move.

So what leaves me a bit puzzled here is that only the SEC has stadium and luxury box standards that we seek from member schools. So why would Kansas throw 350 million at a football stadium and indoor practice facilities? Only in the SEC does every member school have indoor practice facilities. Only in the SEC would they need to prove their investment in football?

Is it just me or has anyone else considered the peculiar nature of this?

It's not just you. My thought would be that someone, somewhere has told Kansas that they need to step their game up.

I can only think of two reasons why a school would agree to spend that much money on a project.

1. They've been guaranteed it will pay off and they just need to make a good faith effort.

2. They've been told they have no shot unless they do something drastic.

I tend to think it's the former in KU's situation because they are not without stature...flagship school, national fan base with an elite basketball brand, and they proved in the Mangino days that they can have a pulse if they put their mind to it.

I believe it was Sankey who said a while back that we should look to our previous additions to get a clue on what our approach would be for the next round. He mentioned AAU schools and contiguous states. Well, we're not getting any ACC schools so Kansas fits that stated criteria about as well as anyone.

I hadn't really thought about it from the angle of luxury seating and amenities, but you're right about that...the SEC is going to put more emphasis on that than anyone else.

It was an unnamed Kansas official who was quoted a few years back as saying the SEC would be an ideal landing spot. An unnamed SEC official was quoted in the same article saying that wasn't a direction they thought they would go in, but he didn't say "never" or "no interest." Missouri was a bridge into the region and Kansas secures a pretty significant slice of that region. They are the yin and yang, if you will, of that part of the country.

But yes, it's always made more sense to me that Kansas would drop that kind of money on football to get the attention of the SEC rather than necessarily to appease anyone else.

And it's always made more sense to me that a conservative state that was centered more around life in small cities and small towns as opposed to metropolitan mega centers while also being the sort of place that is passionate about local college athletics would be a better fit in the SEC as opposed to the B1G regardless of any Midwestern flavor.

Alright, we are in agreement on reasoning. So the next question is straight forward. Who comes with them?

My theory a while back was that ESPN would try to push Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Kansas into the SEC because I felt like those were the products that would profit the network the most and that the SEC was the most convenient place to stick them.

But that's just a theory.