(11-10-2014 08:17 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-10-2014 07:59 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(11-10-2014 07:52 PM)JRsec Wrote:  After giving the Big 12 situation considerable thought I think that if it appears that the Big 12 is indeed going to be the target, rather than the ACC, and if it appears that the ACC is the one that will be secured, then I think the SEC needs to consider doing what it takes to lock that region down. Let West Virginia go to the ACC. Then take Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, and either Iowa State, Baylor or Texas Tech (depending upon who Texas required) and move to 20. If Texas Tech and T.C.U. could wangle a PAC invitation that would be the way to go.

But I say this simply if the ACC is rock solid and no further realignment was expected. My reasoning is that if state schools are divided then Kansas, perhaps Oklahoma and perhaps Texas will go to the Big 10 and the SEC misses out on some of the best prospects. However by taking their state brothers I think you cement those states and the flagships for the SEC.

I do admire your tenacity and I take heart that after your....idealistic scenario, you come back with something a little more grounded in reality.

Getting that 20 team line up would be terrible for the SEC. If the SEC did that, do you think the other conferences would allow any rule changes? Enjoy your two ten team divisions.

This is the problem with the southern mentality. Even one of your best thinking members here has a problem with playing well with others. You create these contests in your heads that you have to win even when they don't exist. The Major Conferences really aren't working that hard against each other. If the SEC was, Slive wouldn't just be sitting back this entire time while letting his expansion prospects come to him.

While all those schools may at times have issues with Texas, they have history with Texas and they would be outsiders entering the SEC. They would all absolutely gather together in a voting block. The people of the SEC that actually make decisions would never allow Texas to have such a coalition within the SEC.


I will say in your favor though that it speaks highly for you that you are now moving more into reality with this realization that the Big 12 is the target and the ACC will be saved.

That's not what I said. I said "if" the ACC was clearly protected and solid "then" we need to consider how to land the top money makers of the Big 12 and the scenario proposed would do it. That said, I agree about the voting block issues and the Longhorn poison. I also agree that for the most part the Big 10 and SEC have been purposefully avoiding each other's interests. And if there is a conclusion to this I still don't rule the ACC out of bounds. There is great money to made from a compromise there. Unfortunately, there isn't much room for compromise with the Big 12 as you well know. Hence the stalemate. So let Texas and Oklahoma have a great football conference built around them after the Big 10 and SEC both take about 4 ACC schools each. It is actually a solution that works, works profitably for all, and works well for FOX, but for ESPN to a much larger degree. We'll see.

I'd like to kick a little dust in the air on this one.

I think the ACC is rock solid. Let's say the anchor football school, FSU, leaves for the SEC and for kicks, brings VT with them. I don't think the ACC schools throw up their hands and say the conference is toast and everyone needs to find a new home. They all chose to sign a GOR because they wanted to be together, and at least some of them clearly had options to go elsewhere. Without FSU, ACC football drops a notch, but they would still have competitive teams that their fans will want to watch and have the possibility from time to time to knock off the big guys. And, most importantly, they still have the best Bball conference and that helps keep them together.

Contrast that with the Big 12. If Texas leaves, the conference is done. Big 12 teams acted primarily out of fear that the conference might fold if Texas left. They dutifully lined up to sign the GOR when Texas asked because many of them were scared ****less that if Texas left they would not find a home elsewhere. Heck, some of the schools offered outsized revenue to Texas to keep the conference alive. Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri and ATM decided to control their own fate and join other conferences. Next time around, the Big 12 will face the same situation, with potentially the PAC, BIG and SEC all courting some combination of Tech, Oklahoma, Kansas and ISU to secure their future by joining a different conference. The Big 12 can't exist with only Texas as the anchor, and despite current on field success, Baylor, TCU, Kansas State are not heavyweights

There really are no great expansion candidates for the Big 12 that would add enough gravitas to the conference to enable it to survive a Texas defection. That's why I think the key to the future is Texas deciding that it prefers to control its own destiny by making a deal with the ACC/ND/FSU - call it a merger, a new conference, whatever - rather than potentially watch another set of top Big 12 teams get picked off when the GORs are up. That solution allows Texas to save face, keep a substantial part of the conference together and not potentially go down with the Big 12 ship.