Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Poll: With the Big 12 in a Quandary What Should the SEC do with regards to the Big 12?
Do Nothing and Wait
Make solid offers to Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and West Virginia and give Texas a couple of days to think about it.
Make solid offers to Oklahoma and Kansas.
Make solid offers to Oklahoma and West Virginia and let Texas suck on it.
Make the Texahoma deal and be done with it.
[Show Results]
 
Post Reply 
What Should The SEC Do Now With Regards to the Big 12?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #41
RE: What Should The SEC Do Now With Regards to the Big 12?
(12-13-2014 09:07 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(12-13-2014 10:39 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-13-2014 03:03 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(12-12-2014 04:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-12-2014 11:20 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  If UT and OU can shake loose the parasites and go together on their own, I think they get with KU and call up the Big 10. It's what their decision makers really want and their fans will like winning more than not winning and they're already used to the idea of playing midwest plains schools. Plus it would be a strong western division in both FB and BB:

Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas/Nebraska/Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota/Northwestern/Illinois (Throw in Uconn to the East for symmetry)

Watch what happens when Arkansas, the last place SEC West team, runs an absolute train on UT in their bowl game. The tone from UT won't be "well that was enjoyable to play an old rival, I wish we could play them every year!" No, thats not UT, it'll be more like "Bunch of SEC cheaters! I hope we stay as far from that hillbilly cesspool as possible and refuse to play them ever again!"

And if Arkansas does run over them that is exactly what you will hear from the UT fans. But their administration is not so stupid as to hand over the state to A&M by going to the Big 10. If they go elsewhere it will either be to the ACC (ESPN) or the PAC (if ESPN gains rights), or the SEC (ESPN), but they will not go to the Big 10 (FOX) as ESPN owns them until 2031 and the breaking of the agreement has to be mutual according to the contract language. And for the average Texan Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, and yes Iowa, might as well be on the moon. Texans gripe about Ames already, do you really think they would be happy with Ames x 4? Not even if Oklahoma shared the pain! Plus 10th if the Austin crowd wants to complain about playing the rustic folk, why the heck do they keep Tech and O.S.U.? No school in the SEC ever smeared human feces on someone's travel bus like they did in Lubbock. That kind of behavior is usually expected at another Big 12 destination much further to the North and East.

But let's look at this from your tact. Texas can't go to the PAC because they would be last in academics among the California schools and that would really sting their pretentious egos, as would the fact that the California schools will consider them to be the "crude" hicks. They'll have a hard time going to the ACC where everyone cares about basketball and the Research Triangle crowd will treat them like the nouveau riche cowboys that they are. If they go to the Big 10 the Midwesterners won't regard them at all. They will never crack the glass ceiling of the old boys club in the Big 10. They will be treated politely but ignored. The Southeast is the only place that would treat them like family, like the family ahole to be sure, but still like family. And personally the only school I have less patience with is Oklahoma. They aren't as cultured as Texas, no better than the mean of the SEC in education, and in many ways are just as pretentious as Austin but with much less reason to be. But both would be treated far better, and find nicer fan bases in the SEC than they will find elsewhere. And having lived for 7 years in the Big 10 country, and having lived on the West coast, and having traveled the Carolina's and I 95 corridor extensively I think I have a pretty good feel for this. BTW, we have family in Madison. They seldom think of the South except when the pecan harvest comes in. They live in a world where the Eastern boundary of the U.S. is NYC the Southern Boundary is Chicago, St. Louis is an excursion into wild country and the Dakota's are the Western boundary. So Texas might as well be next to Argentina.

But I don't think that's a form of existence the Longhorns would be comfortable subjecting themselves too. UT feels it has as much if not more leverage than Notre Dame, a will try and a deal similar to the Irish. Even if the ACC wouldn't give them one, I'm sure the B12 would readily capitulate. The 40 Acres only care about familial perspective as it relates to fan satisfaction and football schedules.

I agree if they can get a special deal in the ACC that it would appeal to them and likely assuage any qualms they may have over having the so called wine and cheese crowd tolerate them. It would probably make all involved happier if they took it. The SEC could still expand West without them. OU and Kansas, OU and WVU, even WVU and Kansas. Even if we still took 4 it would work, but would not be as profitable. We could take that second Texas school, OU, WVU, and Kansas. or if we had to OSU, OU, WVU, and Kansas.

Even with Oklahoma, the SEC needs another Texas school (it won't be the Longhorns).
Why do we need another Texas school? We are wining the recruiting war with one. What other Texas school do we need, and never mind the Longhorns. I still say OU and someone else not from Texas. I like the ACC X, but the very fact that you are bargaining away your conference soul to make special provisions for Notre Dame and Texas tells me the ACC is weaker than they pretend. You you really think the B1G or SEC would do this for any school? No...
12-13-2014 09:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #42
RE: What Should The SEC Do Now With Regards to the Big 12?
(12-13-2014 09:07 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(12-13-2014 10:39 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-13-2014 03:03 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(12-12-2014 04:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-12-2014 11:20 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  If UT and OU can shake loose the parasites and go together on their own, I think they get with KU and call up the Big 10. It's what their decision makers really want and their fans will like winning more than not winning and they're already used to the idea of playing midwest plains schools. Plus it would be a strong western division in both FB and BB:

Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas/Nebraska/Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota/Northwestern/Illinois (Throw in Uconn to the East for symmetry)

Watch what happens when Arkansas, the last place SEC West team, runs an absolute train on UT in their bowl game. The tone from UT won't be "well that was enjoyable to play an old rival, I wish we could play them every year!" No, thats not UT, it'll be more like "Bunch of SEC cheaters! I hope we stay as far from that hillbilly cesspool as possible and refuse to play them ever again!"

And if Arkansas does run over them that is exactly what you will hear from the UT fans. But their administration is not so stupid as to hand over the state to A&M by going to the Big 10. If they go elsewhere it will either be to the ACC (ESPN) or the PAC (if ESPN gains rights), or the SEC (ESPN), but they will not go to the Big 10 (FOX) as ESPN owns them until 2031 and the breaking of the agreement has to be mutual according to the contract language. And for the average Texan Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, and yes Iowa, might as well be on the moon. Texans gripe about Ames already, do you really think they would be happy with Ames x 4? Not even if Oklahoma shared the pain! Plus 10th if the Austin crowd wants to complain about playing the rustic folk, why the heck do they keep Tech and O.S.U.? No school in the SEC ever smeared human feces on someone's travel bus like they did in Lubbock. That kind of behavior is usually expected at another Big 12 destination much further to the North and East.

But let's look at this from your tact. Texas can't go to the PAC because they would be last in academics among the California schools and that would really sting their pretentious egos, as would the fact that the California schools will consider them to be the "crude" hicks. They'll have a hard time going to the ACC where everyone cares about basketball and the Research Triangle crowd will treat them like the nouveau riche cowboys that they are. If they go to the Big 10 the Midwesterners won't regard them at all. They will never crack the glass ceiling of the old boys club in the Big 10. They will be treated politely but ignored. The Southeast is the only place that would treat them like family, like the family ahole to be sure, but still like family. And personally the only school I have less patience with is Oklahoma. They aren't as cultured as Texas, no better than the mean of the SEC in education, and in many ways are just as pretentious as Austin but with much less reason to be. But both would be treated far better, and find nicer fan bases in the SEC than they will find elsewhere. And having lived for 7 years in the Big 10 country, and having lived on the West coast, and having traveled the Carolina's and I 95 corridor extensively I think I have a pretty good feel for this. BTW, we have family in Madison. They seldom think of the South except when the pecan harvest comes in. They live in a world where the Eastern boundary of the U.S. is NYC the Southern Boundary is Chicago, St. Louis is an excursion into wild country and the Dakota's are the Western boundary. So Texas might as well be next to Argentina.

But I don't think that's a form of existence the Longhorns would be comfortable subjecting themselves too. UT feels it has as much if not more leverage than Notre Dame, a will try and a deal similar to the Irish. Even if the ACC wouldn't give them one, I'm sure the B12 would readily capitulate. The 40 Acres only care about familial perspective as it relates to fan satisfaction and football schedules.

I agree if they can get a special deal in the ACC that it would appeal to them and likely assuage any qualms they may have over having the so called wine and cheese crowd tolerate them. It would probably make all involved happier if they took it. The SEC could still expand West without them. OU and Kansas, OU and WVU, even WVU and Kansas. Even if we still took 4 it would work, but would not be as profitable. We could take that second Texas school, OU, WVU, and Kansas. or if we had to OSU, OU, WVU, and Kansas.

Even with Oklahoma, the SEC needs another Texas school (it won't be the Longhorns).

Actually I would be relieved. And of the remaining three my preferences would be Baylor (good academics, good hoops, decent football, good baseball), then T.C.U. (good football, good baseball), and then Texas Tech (I have nothing against them it's just danged far.)
12-14-2014 06:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #43
RE: What Should The SEC Do Now With Regards to the Big 12?
(12-13-2014 09:58 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(12-13-2014 09:07 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(12-13-2014 10:39 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-13-2014 03:03 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(12-12-2014 04:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  And if Arkansas does run over them that is exactly what you will hear from the UT fans. But their administration is not so stupid as to hand over the state to A&M by going to the Big 10. If they go elsewhere it will either be to the ACC (ESPN) or the PAC (if ESPN gains rights), or the SEC (ESPN), but they will not go to the Big 10 (FOX) as ESPN owns them until 2031 and the breaking of the agreement has to be mutual according to the contract language. And for the average Texan Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, and yes Iowa, might as well be on the moon. Texans gripe about Ames already, do you really think they would be happy with Ames x 4? Not even if Oklahoma shared the pain! Plus 10th if the Austin crowd wants to complain about playing the rustic folk, why the heck do they keep Tech and O.S.U.? No school in the SEC ever smeared human feces on someone's travel bus like they did in Lubbock. That kind of behavior is usually expected at another Big 12 destination much further to the North and East.

But let's look at this from your tact. Texas can't go to the PAC because they would be last in academics among the California schools and that would really sting their pretentious egos, as would the fact that the California schools will consider them to be the "crude" hicks. They'll have a hard time going to the ACC where everyone cares about basketball and the Research Triangle crowd will treat them like the nouveau riche cowboys that they are. If they go to the Big 10 the Midwesterners won't regard them at all. They will never crack the glass ceiling of the old boys club in the Big 10. They will be treated politely but ignored. The Southeast is the only place that would treat them like family, like the family ahole to be sure, but still like family. And personally the only school I have less patience with is Oklahoma. They aren't as cultured as Texas, no better than the mean of the SEC in education, and in many ways are just as pretentious as Austin but with much less reason to be. But both would be treated far better, and find nicer fan bases in the SEC than they will find elsewhere. And having lived for 7 years in the Big 10 country, and having lived on the West coast, and having traveled the Carolina's and I 95 corridor extensively I think I have a pretty good feel for this. BTW, we have family in Madison. They seldom think of the South except when the pecan harvest comes in. They live in a world where the Eastern boundary of the U.S. is NYC the Southern Boundary is Chicago, St. Louis is an excursion into wild country and the Dakota's are the Western boundary. So Texas might as well be next to Argentina.

But I don't think that's a form of existence the Longhorns would be comfortable subjecting themselves too. UT feels it has as much if not more leverage than Notre Dame, a will try and a deal similar to the Irish. Even if the ACC wouldn't give them one, I'm sure the B12 would readily capitulate. The 40 Acres only care about familial perspective as it relates to fan satisfaction and football schedules.

I agree if they can get a special deal in the ACC that it would appeal to them and likely assuage any qualms they may have over having the so called wine and cheese crowd tolerate them. It would probably make all involved happier if they took it. The SEC could still expand West without them. OU and Kansas, OU and WVU, even WVU and Kansas. Even if we still took 4 it would work, but would not be as profitable. We could take that second Texas school, OU, WVU, and Kansas. or if we had to OSU, OU, WVU, and Kansas.

Even with Oklahoma, the SEC needs another Texas school (it won't be the Longhorns).
Why do we need another Texas school? We are wining the recruiting war with one. What other Texas school do we need, and never mind the Longhorns. I still say OU and someone else not from Texas. I like the ACC X, but the very fact that you are bargaining away your conference soul to make special provisions for Notre Dame and Texas tells me the ACC is weaker than they pretend. You you really think the B1G or SEC would do this for any school? No...

Medic,
You need another Texas school, because A&M will never be able to deliver the entire state of Texas over the long term. Could Michigan State deliver all of Michigan or could Auburn deliver all of Alabama, No of course not? Since Oklahoma will spark interest in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area, I would go with another school in east Texas to try to help establish a SEC territory. My choice would be Baylor. While the Baylor fan base might not be large they do command a huge secondary fan affiliation throughout the entire southeast.....the Baptist Church. Never underestimate a bunch of Baptists in the South.
As for the ACC and Texas. It is my personal belief that ESPN would rather have Texas go west so that they (ESPN) could capture a portion of the Pacific Coast market rather than try to sell the sell the Texas market on ACC athletics. I think that Texas would rather be offered a partial in the ACC. That way they could schedule at 4-6 OOC games within the state of Texas (including the RRR w/Oklahoma). The devil in that debate would be in the details of the contract between Texas and ESPN.
From what I have been led to believe, the ACC is not actively seeking Texas as a full or partial member, and most of that talk originated out of Texas. A Notre Dame poll a few weeks ago showed that the addition of Texas would not influence the attitudes of Irish fans re: full membership in the ACC. Why would ESPN waste a valuable asset in Texas if it wouldn't help to land the Irish on a full time basis?
BTW, I do know that the Kansas President made several trips to Greensboro when the Big 12 was in limbo several years ago.
12-14-2014 02:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #44
RE: What Should The SEC Do Now With Regards to the Big 12?
(12-14-2014 02:05 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(12-13-2014 09:58 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(12-13-2014 09:07 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(12-13-2014 10:39 AM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-13-2014 03:03 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  But I don't think that's a form of existence the Longhorns would be comfortable subjecting themselves too. UT feels it has as much if not more leverage than Notre Dame, a will try and a deal similar to the Irish. Even if the ACC wouldn't give them one, I'm sure the B12 would readily capitulate. The 40 Acres only care about familial perspective as it relates to fan satisfaction and football schedules.

I agree if they can get a special deal in the ACC that it would appeal to them and likely assuage any qualms they may have over having the so called wine and cheese crowd tolerate them. It would probably make all involved happier if they took it. The SEC could still expand West without them. OU and Kansas, OU and WVU, even WVU and Kansas. Even if we still took 4 it would work, but would not be as profitable. We could take that second Texas school, OU, WVU, and Kansas. or if we had to OSU, OU, WVU, and Kansas.

Even with Oklahoma, the SEC needs another Texas school (it won't be the Longhorns).
Why do we need another Texas school? We are wining the recruiting war with one. What other Texas school do we need, and never mind the Longhorns. I still say OU and someone else not from Texas. I like the ACC X, but the very fact that you are bargaining away your conference soul to make special provisions for Notre Dame and Texas tells me the ACC is weaker than they pretend. You you really think the B1G or SEC would do this for any school? No...

Medic,
You need another Texas school, because A&M will never be able to deliver the entire state of Texas over the long term. Could Michigan State deliver all of Michigan or could Auburn deliver all of Alabama, No of course not? Since Oklahoma will spark interest in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area, I would go with another school in east Texas to try to help establish a SEC territory. My choice would be Baylor. While the Baylor fan base might not be large they do command a huge secondary fan affiliation throughout the entire southeast.....the Baptist Church. Never underestimate a bunch of Baptists in the South.
As for the ACC and Texas. It is my personal belief that ESPN would rather have Texas go west so that they (ESPN) could capture a portion of the Pacific Coast market rather than try to sell the sell the Texas market on ACC athletics. I think that Texas would rather be offered a partial in the ACC. That way they could schedule at 4-6 OOC games within the state of Texas (including the RRR w/Oklahoma). The devil in that debate would be in the details of the contract between Texas and ESPN.
From what I have been led to believe, the ACC is not actively seeking Texas as a full or partial member, and most of that talk originated out of Texas. A Notre Dame poll a few weeks ago showed that the addition of Texas would not influence the attitudes of Irish fans re: full membership in the ACC. Why would ESPN waste a valuable asset in Texas if it wouldn't help to land the Irish on a full time basis?
BTW, I do know that the Kansas President made several trips to Greensboro when the Big 12 was in limbo several years ago.

I don't know if the SEC would seriously consider Kansas but with Oklahoma it might be possible. But if we decided they didn't fit our brand, or vice versa, no matter where Texas might choose to go, provided it's not the SEC, then I would agree with your assessment. Texas Tech while an oil funded state school is just too far West to be comfortable for the SEC West to travel. If we have Oklahoma we don't need T.C.U. and they would pair well with TTU for the PAC if Texas went elsewhere. Baylor is the choice for a number of reasons, and as many don't know it is the oldest university in the state of Texas. I would simply add that a second school to play in Texas would also help the SEC recruit the state.
12-14-2014 03:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
USAFMEDIC Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,914
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 189
I Root For: MIZZOU/FSU/USM
Location: Biloxi, MS
Post: #45
RE: What Should The SEC Do Now With Regards to the Big 12?
(12-14-2014 03:08 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-14-2014 02:05 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(12-13-2014 09:58 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  
(12-13-2014 09:07 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(12-13-2014 10:39 AM)JRsec Wrote:  I agree if they can get a special deal in the ACC that it would appeal to them and likely assuage any qualms they may have over having the so called wine and cheese crowd tolerate them. It would probably make all involved happier if they took it. The SEC could still expand West without them. OU and Kansas, OU and WVU, even WVU and Kansas. Even if we still took 4 it would work, but would not be as profitable. We could take that second Texas school, OU, WVU, and Kansas. or if we had to OSU, OU, WVU, and Kansas.

Even with Oklahoma, the SEC needs another Texas school (it won't be the Longhorns).
Why do we need another Texas school? We are wining the recruiting war with one. What other Texas school do we need, and never mind the Longhorns. I still say OU and someone else not from Texas. I like the ACC X, but the very fact that you are bargaining away your conference soul to make special provisions for Notre Dame and Texas tells me the ACC is weaker than they pretend. You you really think the B1G or SEC would do this for any school? No...

Medic,
You need another Texas school, because A&M will never be able to deliver the entire state of Texas over the long term. Could Michigan State deliver all of Michigan or could Auburn deliver all of Alabama, No of course not? Since Oklahoma will spark interest in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area, I would go with another school in east Texas to try to help establish a SEC territory. My choice would be Baylor. While the Baylor fan base might not be large they do command a huge secondary fan affiliation throughout the entire southeast.....the Baptist Church. Never underestimate a bunch of Baptists in the South.
As for the ACC and Texas. It is my personal belief that ESPN would rather have Texas go west so that they (ESPN) could capture a portion of the Pacific Coast market rather than try to sell the sell the Texas market on ACC athletics. I think that Texas would rather be offered a partial in the ACC. That way they could schedule at 4-6 OOC games within the state of Texas (including the RRR w/Oklahoma). The devil in that debate would be in the details of the contract between Texas and ESPN.
From what I have been led to believe, the ACC is not actively seeking Texas as a full or partial member, and most of that talk originated out of Texas. A Notre Dame poll a few weeks ago showed that the addition of Texas would not influence the attitudes of Irish fans re: full membership in the ACC. Why would ESPN waste a valuable asset in Texas if it wouldn't help to land the Irish on a full time basis?
BTW, I do know that the Kansas President made several trips to Greensboro when the Big 12 was in limbo several years ago.

I don't know if the SEC would seriously consider Kansas but with Oklahoma it might be possible. But if we decided they didn't fit our brand, or vice versa, no matter where Texas might choose to go, provided it's not the SEC, then I would agree with your assessment. Texas Tech while an oil funded state school is just too far West to be comfortable for the SEC West to travel. If we have Oklahoma we don't need T.C.U. and they would pair well with TTU for the PAC if Texas went elsewhere. Baylor is the choice for a number of reasons, and as many don't know it is the oldest university in the state of Texas. I would simply add that a second school to play in Texas would also help the SEC recruit the state.
Baylor would certainly grow and expand as an SEC member. They have the fan base and money. Mizzou and A&M started adding seats the minute they joined. UT would really hate this.
12-15-2014 12:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,358
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 357
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #46
RE: What Should The SEC Do Now With Regards to the Big 12?
Obviously I'm biased but I think adding another Texas team is a waste of an expansion slot just like adding FSU or Clemson would be a waste of a slot as well (unless we were going into the mega super 20+ size range ) We need teams that maximize value to our Tier 3 deal and teams in areas we are already getting full in state rate from the top cable providers don't do that.

Now that is why I think ONE of the oklahoma schools (again, redundancy is bad, it's why the Big 12 is in such a bad place) could be a real value since it would bring a new state into the foot print for TV while also expanding the SEC brand in DFW (OSU/A&M/Arky/LSU in DFW would be very potent)

If we could get KU to come along with the Okie school that would be a huge coup for SEC basketball
(This post was last modified: 12-15-2014 04:57 PM by 10thMountain.)
12-15-2014 04:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #47
RE: What Should The SEC Do Now With Regards to the Big 12?
(12-15-2014 04:53 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Obviously I'm biased but I think adding another Texas team is a waste of an expansion slot just like adding FSU or Clemson would be a waste of a slot as well (unless we were going into the mega super 20+ size range ) We need teams that maximize value to our Tier 3 deal and teams in areas we are already getting full in state rate from the top cable providers don't do that.

Now that is why I think ONE of the oklahoma schools (again, redundancy is bad, it's why the Big 12 is in such a bad place) could be a real value since it would bring a new state into the foot print for TV while also expanding the SEC brand in DFW (OSU/A&M/Arky/LSU in DFW would be very potent)

If we could get KU to come along with the Okie school that would be a huge coup for SEC basketball

I don't disagree with that position at all 10th. And I also agree that we would be dollars ahead, not content, if we added a North Carolina or Virginia school. I just don't think that ESPN is going to broker the ACC as long as there is a chance they can land Notre Dame there. So optimally Kansas and Oklahoma as states would be a great way to finish out the West. I suppose the other option out there would be an Oklahoma school and West Virginia. Kansas would be the better academic add and a hoops icon. WVU would be an interesting market move and would add competitive, but not dominant, programs for most sports, except baseball. I'm just ready for two more so we can divide into 4 regional half divisions and set up equitable scheduling that covers the conference every three years.

And let's face it, if we ever needed to expand further 18 is still very workable as is 20.
12-15-2014 05:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #48
RE: What Should The SEC Do Now With Regards to the Big 12?
Folks, let's talk a bit about timing and math. At no point since the loss of Missouri and A&M has the Big 12 felt their vulnerability more than now. The snubs of T.C.U. and Baylor have really shaken their world. Now is the time for any conference interested in Big 12 schools to make their moves. Brokering is a bit touchy because they aren't solely in one network's hands. But make no mistake there are much bigger reasons to act, than not to to act.

Let's start with the playoff money. Eliminating 1 conference adds 12.5 milion more to each conference and guarantees that money annually. The two additions would add markets raising the network payout. National brands would boost the payout for the regular TV contracts. So conservatively speaking it would not be unlikely for each conference to to be able to pay their existing schools an extra 2.5 per school (more for the PAC) should the eventuality of the Big 12's demise be realized.

Strategically there are only 3 programs that any conference would take and a few more that might have value to one or more conferences. To those bold enough to move first the best fruits may fall. Part of realignment has been the jockeying of both networks and conferences for those best and final pieces to this realignment.

The SEC has a history of being proactive, if not innovative. It's time for that again.

The Big Boy on the block is always the Big 10 and for really just one reason, they make more money. Their lot is with FOX. The ACC and SEC have their lots cast with ESPN. You do realize that if the ACC lands Texas in any kind of a format and if the SEC takes Oklahoma and Kansas what the implications for the Big 10 would be? There would be no viable programs left in the Big 12 for them to absorb outside of Iowa State which for them holds no value. The PAC might or might not take Big 12 schools for the market and time zone. But any kind of move that removes Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas from the market will result in limiting Big 10 expansion from anywhere other than the PAC. Texas with N.D. in any capacity stabilizes the ACC. An SEC with Kansas and Oklahoma would be set as well and Missouri would no longer even have a temptation to leave (not that I believe they have an inclination to do so anyway). If the PAC expanded with 4 programs or possibly 6 then realignment is over.

If the PAC takes 4 then everyone will say we are one short of what we need to dissolve. But in that case the ACC can simply take WVU to 16 full members and Texas and N.D. keep an affiliation.

Such a move cements ESPN's position, and gives the SEC a huge boost up on the Big 10.

If we wait and the Big 12 does something stupid, like add two G5 programs, then this whole thing gets much stickier to deal with.

And remember if we don't make such a move the Big 10 certainly will because they understand the circumstances as well.

So a move to at least 16 gives the SEC more money in their contracts, control of more bowls, and the freedom to schedule more flexibly while getting a leg up on the competition. The same is true for the ACC and could be for the PAC as well. I say get her done.
(This post was last modified: 12-18-2014 07:00 PM by JRsec.)
12-18-2014 06:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jhawkmvp Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 443
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 35
I Root For: Kansas
Location: Over the Rainbow
Post: #49
RE: What Should The SEC Do Now With Regards to the Big 12?
I think the only B12 schools in panic mode are the smaller schools, and to be honest they are going to be in that mode (to varying degrees), until the B12 makes a move that stabilizes it permanently. Texas and OU are not worried about TCU and Baylor being left out. They feel (and probably correctly) that if it was one of them, instead of TCU or Baylor, they are in the playoff. Until one of them gets left out, I don't think they are very concerned about the other schools being left out. The bulk of the playoff money is given based on just being a member of the P5 club so there are not heavy ramifications for being left out.

Personally, I believe the B12 is primarily making expansion noise to get what they want as far as deregulation of how conferences determine their champion, which is in all conferences best interests (see semi-finals, pods, 3 division format, etc), or a lesser possibility is to get the other power conferences to take in all or most (at least 8) of the B12 schools, if it disbands. The B12 for the most part is an uneasy alliance. There is not much love there any longer. It has become the small regional conference it was created to prevent. The national exposure for programs like OU and Texas (due to 2-3 games on the LHN) is lacking. Too many close, long existing ties have been severed with NU, MU, A&M and CU leaving. Even OU seems to be chafing at Texas lately. If all schools can find a good home, Texas and OU are happy with where they move, then I don't think the B12 would fight too hard to survive. The other B12 schools just want a permanent, stable, power conference home. Expanding with lesser programs will just lead to the more valuable programs leaving down the line, which would decrease the conference's value more than the additions would increase it. Just look at the Big East and it's various defections over the years.

The winter meetings about the new regulations for the P5 would be a perfect time and cover to talk about further consolidation. The B1G would definitely like to have 16 schools when it comes time for them to bid out their T1. The SEC hates it's current, unbalanced scheduling at 14 and I think would love to be the pioneer of conference semis. The PAC covets CST schools, especially in Texas, and more possible households for their network, might help them with some of their carriage issues. The ACC would like to see the B12 die as that likely cements their long-term survival and it might force ND to join in full as a champs-only model is likely adopted for the playoff. The B12 schools want permanent stability (even OU wants this, look at the talks they have had with everyone), which is something the B12 can't provide at this time. If the B12 is talking up expansion to get all their schools placed in a P5 conference something could happen this winter. It also gets rid of the committee issue and allows a champs only model and makes the conference CG and possible semi's worth much more to conferences as these become defacto play-off games themselves.

The SEC can only currently end the B12 with the help of at least one other conference (likely the ACC and/or B1G) as the GoR would hinder any small number of schools defecting the B12, unless there is an unknown out somewhere, for the near future. The easiest way, if the SEC was trying to beat the B1G to the punch (instead of working with the B1G) and limit B1G expansion opportunities into the south, would be to partner with the ACC. We have discussed this scenario a few times in the past. There are lots of ways this could be done.
(This post was last modified: 12-19-2014 01:31 AM by jhawkmvp.)
12-19-2014 01:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #50
RE: What Should The SEC Do Now With Regards to the Big 12?
(12-19-2014 01:27 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  I think the only B12 schools in panic mode are the smaller schools, and to be honest they are going to be in that mode (to varying degrees), until the B12 makes a move that stabilizes it permanently. Texas and OU are not worried about TCU and Baylor being left out. They feel (and probably correctly) that if it was one of them, instead of TCU or Baylor, they are in the playoff. Until one of them gets left out, I don't think they are very concerned about the other schools being left out. The bulk of the playoff money is given based on just being a member of the P5 club so there are not heavy ramifications for being left out.

Personally, I believe the B12 is primarily making expansion noise to get what they want as far as deregulation of how conferences determine their champion, which is in all conferences best interests (see semi-finals, pods, 3 division format, etc), or a lesser possibility is to get the other power conferences to take in all or most (at least 8) of the B12 schools, if it disbands. The B12 for the most part is an uneasy alliance. There is not much love there any longer. It has become the small regional conference it was created to prevent. The national exposure for programs like OU and Texas (due to 2-3 games on the LHN) is lacking. Too many close, long existing ties have been severed with NU, MU, A&M and CU leaving. Even OU seems to be chafing at Texas lately. If all schools can find a good home, Texas and OU are happy with where they move, then I don't think the B12 would fight too hard to survive. The other B12 schools just want a permanent, stable, power conference home. Expanding with lesser programs will just lead to the more valuable programs leaving down the line, which would decrease the conference's value more than the additions would increase it. Just look at the Big East and it's various defections over the years.

The winter meetings about the new regulations for the P5 would be a perfect time and cover to talk about further consolidation. The B1G would definitely like to have 16 schools when it comes time for them to bid out their T1. The SEC hates it's current, unbalanced scheduling at 14 and I think would love to be the pioneer of conference semis. The PAC covets CST schools, especially in Texas, and more possible households for their network, might help them with some of their carriage issues. The ACC would like to see the B12 die as that likely cements their long-term survival and it might force ND to join in full as a champs-only model is likely adopted for the playoff. The B12 schools want permanent stability (even OU wants this, look at the talks they have had with everyone), which is something the B12 can't provide at this time. If the B12 is talking up expansion to get all their schools placed in a P5 conference something could happen this winter. It also gets rid of the committee issue and allows a champs only model and makes the conference CG and possible semi's worth much more to conferences as these become defacto play-off games themselves.

The SEC can only currently end the B12 with the help of at least one other conference (likely the ACC and/or B1G) as the GoR would hinder any small number of schools defecting the B12, unless there is an unknown out somewhere, for the near future. The easiest way, if the SEC was trying to beat the B1G to the punch (instead of working with the B1G) and limit B1G expansion opportunities into the south, would be to partner with the ACC. We have discussed this scenario a few times in the past. There are lots of ways this could be done.

I always appreciate your perspective. There are many ways to end this and I think it is in everyone's best interest to do so. We'll know more after the playoffs. Nobody likes to distract the games with realignment. Ollie Luck's move is interesting. It may simply be what it is, but the timing of it following the playoff selections is interesting nonetheless.
12-19-2014 04:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.