(02-27-2016 03:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-27-2016 12:57 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 08:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-26-2016 07:43 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Obviously we aren't going to support being essentially sent back to the Big 12 by adding half the B12 south. At best we'd support ONE Oklahoma school and MAYBE one more Texas school but probably not another public school (I can see us being OK with TCU or SMU to shore up DFW)

Well, given your Sig I wouldn't have guessed that in a million years!

True but you know from my history I've said for a long time now that IF another Texas school is considered absolutely necessary by the conference then our best move (and the one I believe A&M would throw its support behind rather than fight) would be one of the two DFW private schools to install a physical presence of the SEC there in what is otherwise largely a CFB no-man's land. Having a stake in the conference by having its members coming to your city all year long and spending money there on hotels, restaurants and entertainment is the best way to quickly get the papers and media there behind you and pumping you over another conference that only shows up to your city once a year.

Now yes, my bias leans toward TCU (though I think anyone else would consider them the better, more developed pick anyway) I also think that SMU could in fact be a viable pick. They have good academics and deep pockets...and with something to actually care about spending on again, I think they could quickly become as respectable in FB as they've made themselves in basketball.

And the only issue I would have with T.C.U. would be if Oklahoma was the other school then A&M and the Sooners give us enough of the DFW market anyway. Now if we aren't forced to take another Texas school along with the Sooners I think we could both agree that barring any possible ACC selection that West Virginia then starts to make some sense. And that could be why Gee is backing Boren here. I don't know as I haven't heard anything to that effect, but it would make some sense.

I do sympathize with your point about the makeup of the DFW area, but I do agree that there are compelling reasons to select TCU even if we land OU.

While OU's fan base in the area would guarantee good coverage of the SEC and carriage of the SECN, it wouldn't necessarily garner the interest of the casual fan that might not have a connection to an out of state school. A&M's inclusion obviously mitigates this a little bit, but their alumni mostly reside in Houston and other parts of the state.

DFW is a metro area of nearly 7M people. It is the 4th largest Metropolitan Statistical Area in the country behind only NYC, LA, and Chicago. It's bigger than Houston and about 1M people larger than Miami. It's also larger than Atlanta. I think it is worth taking TCU to truly lock down DFW and make it SEC territory as opposed to simply a market to which the SEC has a presence. It would also give SEC schools multiple opportunities to play games in TX. That would be excellent for recruiting.

When the market dynamics change and dedicated eyeballs become more important, I think it will behoove us to give the people of DFW a reason to tune in to a local product. Now if we end up with UT and OU then it's a different argument, but if UT is unwilling then I really think that is the best move.

If we're taking 4 Big 12 schools then how about this?

Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TCU, and West Virginia?