(09-27-2016 05:41 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 09:02 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  This could work

LSU would certainly be in favor of it. The MS schools would object.

I know the MS schools value their games with the Alabama schools and Kentucky/Vandy. The old SEC rivalries were truly screwy, at least from my perspective.

With this lineup at least, we could finally do away with permanent cross overs

(09-28-2016 03:15 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 05:41 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 09:02 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  This could work

LSU would certainly be in favor of it. The MS schools would object.

I know the MS schools value their games with the Alabama schools and Kentucky/Vandy. The old SEC rivalries were truly screwy, at least from my perspective.

With this lineup at least, we could finally do away with permanent cross overs

Look, I have no animosity for either of the Mississippi schools but their games with Auburn and Alabama do not even compare with Alabama / Tennessee & Auburn Georgia. But what people forget is that Auburn until '91 Auburn played Tennessee, Florida and Georgia every year. The East was essentially our home division.

Any additions from the Big 12 need to be added to the West and Missouri needs to move West and Auburn and Alabama to the East. Then absolutely end the permanent rivals.

(09-28-2016 03:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 03:15 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 05:41 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 09:02 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  This could work

LSU would certainly be in favor of it. The MS schools would object.

I know the MS schools value their games with the Alabama schools and Kentucky/Vandy. The old SEC rivalries were truly screwy, at least from my perspective.

With this lineup at least, we could finally do away with permanent cross overs

Look, I have no animosity for either of the Mississippi schools but their games with Auburn and Alabama do not even compare with Alabama / Tennessee & Auburn Georgia. But what people forget is that Auburn until '91 Auburn played Tennessee, Florida and Georgia every year. The East was essentially our home division.

Any additions from the Big 12 need to be added to the West and Missouri needs to move West and Auburn and Alabama to the East. Then absolutely end the permanent rivals.

Hopefully when CR is completed the SEC southeast will be comprised of Florida, Georgia, South Carolina and Auburn (as it should be).
The other divisions should be the Mississippi schools, Tennessee and Alabama.
Team X, A&M, LSU and Arkansas, and Team Y, Missouri, Kentucky and Vanderbilt.

(09-28-2016 03:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 03:15 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 05:41 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 09:02 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  This could work

LSU would certainly be in favor of it. The MS schools would object.

I know the MS schools value their games with the Alabama schools and Kentucky/Vandy. The old SEC rivalries were truly screwy, at least from my perspective.

With this lineup at least, we could finally do away with permanent cross overs

Look, I have no animosity for either of the Mississippi schools but their games with Auburn and Alabama do not even compare with Alabama / Tennessee & Auburn Georgia. But what people forget is that Auburn until '91 Auburn played Tennessee, Florida and Georgia every year. The East was essentially our home division.

Any additions from the Big 12 need to be added to the West and Missouri needs to move West and Auburn and Alabama to the East. Then absolutely end the permanent rivals.

I don't. UT was essentially an SEC West school prior to expansion

(09-28-2016 04:19 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 03:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 03:15 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 05:41 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 09:02 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  This could work

LSU would certainly be in favor of it. The MS schools would object.

I know the MS schools value their games with the Alabama schools and Kentucky/Vandy. The old SEC rivalries were truly screwy, at least from my perspective.

With this lineup at least, we could finally do away with permanent cross overs

Look, I have no animosity for either of the Mississippi schools but their games with Auburn and Alabama do not even compare with Alabama / Tennessee & Auburn Georgia. But what people forget is that Auburn until '91 Auburn played Tennessee, Florida and Georgia every year. The East was essentially our home division.

Any additions from the Big 12 need to be added to the West and Missouri needs to move West and Auburn and Alabama to the East. Then absolutely end the permanent rivals.

I don't. UT was essentially an SEC West school prior to expansion

Ole Miss is the only school out of L.S.U., Miss State & Ole Miss that Tennessee had much history with Vandiver. The new East would be:

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee & Vanderbilt.

That's as good as it is going to get if we move to no permanent rivals which if we can rotate the other divisions' schools much more effectively through our schedule.

9 conference games with 7 divisional and 2 annual rotations from the other division gets you through the other division in 4 years. So during one class rotation a player will have the opportunity to play all of the conference schools.

(09-28-2016 04:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 04:19 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 03:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 03:15 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 05:41 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  LSU would certainly be in favor of it. The MS schools would object.

I know the MS schools value their games with the Alabama schools and Kentucky/Vandy. The old SEC rivalries were truly screwy, at least from my perspective.

With this lineup at least, we could finally do away with permanent cross overs

Look, I have no animosity for either of the Mississippi schools but their games with Auburn and Alabama do not even compare with Alabama / Tennessee & Auburn Georgia. But what people forget is that Auburn until '91 Auburn played Tennessee, Florida and Georgia every year. The East was essentially our home division.

Any additions from the Big 12 need to be added to the West and Missouri needs to move West and Auburn and Alabama to the East. Then absolutely end the permanent rivals.

I don't. UT was essentially an SEC West school prior to expansion

Ole Miss is the only school out of L.S.U., Miss State & Ole Miss that Tennessee had much history with Vandiver. The new East would be:

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee & Vanderbilt.

That's as good as it is going to get if we move to no permanent rivals which if we can rotate the other divisions' schools much more effectively through our schedule.

9 conference games with 7 divisional and 2 annual rotations from the other division gets you through the other division in 4 years. So during one class rotation a player will have the opportunity to play all of the conference schools.

I know. I'm not in love with Bama moving East both I can live with it to get Auburn back on the schedule. And you're correct regarding Ole Miss, but that would also include the Alabama schools as well.

(09-28-2016 06:29 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 04:34 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 04:19 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 03:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 03:15 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  I know the MS schools value their games with the Alabama schools and Kentucky/Vandy. The old SEC rivalries were truly screwy, at least from my perspective.

With this lineup at least, we could finally do away with permanent cross overs

Look, I have no animosity for either of the Mississippi schools but their games with Auburn and Alabama do not even compare with Alabama / Tennessee & Auburn Georgia. But what people forget is that Auburn until '91 Auburn played Tennessee, Florida and Georgia every year. The East was essentially our home division.

Any additions from the Big 12 need to be added to the West and Missouri needs to move West and Auburn and Alabama to the East. Then absolutely end the permanent rivals.

I don't. UT was essentially an SEC West school prior to expansion

Ole Miss is the only school out of L.S.U., Miss State & Ole Miss that Tennessee had much history with Vandiver. The new East would be:

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee & Vanderbilt.

That's as good as it is going to get if we move to no permanent rivals which if we can rotate the other divisions' schools much more effectively through our schedule.

9 conference games with 7 divisional and 2 annual rotations from the other division gets you through the other division in 4 years. So during one class rotation a player will have the opportunity to play all of the conference schools.

I know. I'm not in love with Bama moving East both I can live with it to get Auburn back on the schedule. And you're correct regarding Ole Miss, but that would also include the Alabama schools as well.

They might gripe and moan at first, but I bet they would love to be out from under Alabama and Auburn's shadow. Both Alabama schools hold a majority of victories against the Mississippi schools. Besides both are good enough now to make a run at the West if Bama isn't there. That's got to help them emerge!

(09-28-2016 01:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Now if you assume that the it isn't likely that any conference lands both Oklahoma and Texas then the SEC can logically hope to land one of them. The question then becomes who else do we take. It sure as crap isn't going to be West Virginia who tugs us down from all of our means including attendance. If the conference penchant for wanting academic upgrades is to be followed it will either be (all from the Big 12) and assuming that team #1 selected is either OU or UT, Kansas, Iowa State, or T.C.U./O.S.U. T.C.U. isn't needed if #1 is either OU or UT. O.S.U. may be required for OU but isn't wanted on its own. Between I.S.U. and Kansas we have Missouri's interest to consider and ESPN's emphasis in finishing realignment will likely be the restoration of split rivalries. That favors Kansas. Since OU will insist on OU and since Texas is grumbling about placement for minor sports, I'm leaning toward Texas and Kansas as a possible pairing for the SEC. OU's Boren will select the Big 10 & Nebraska if he can't get OSU in anywhere.

But whether I'm wrong or right about this the SEC will land either Texas or Oklahoma or we won't expand. If we land one then Kansas has a good shot.

Cincinnati is not AAU, is below the mean in attendance and athletic spending, and doesn't offer all the requisite sports. Neither did W.V.U. Iowa State would have to add baseball back. But they don't have a natural tie in with the SEC unless Kansas is here and since Kansas would be taking that slot, oh well. If the choice is OU you may as well bet OSU will be the tag-along. So if the SEC wants DFW and a new market Texas and Kansas has appeal.

There was actually an internet rumor a few months back that proclaimed Texas and Kansas were the top targets.

The SEC makes all the sense in the world for Texas. Not sure their ego will allow it, but who knows.

Kansas is a solid addition. They multiply our basketball content immensely. They along with Kentucky would be the only true basketball schools in the league. I know basketball makes up a minority of the revenue, but that's several months out of the year in which the SEC lags in exposure.

It may be true that some of our schools are capable of fielding greater basketball programs, but I honestly don't expect that to happen. I know the league has focused on it the last couple of years and there have certainly been some upgrades when it comes to coaching, but iron sharpens iron. With that said, it's hard for fans to get excited when they are not watching excellent competition. The thing that a Kentucky gives us is an excellent competitor for fans to get excited about when their team gets matched up.

We obviously don't have very many of those, but Kansas would be another. Honestly, I'd feel better about having a couple more in addition to that, but that's unlikely.

My favorite scenario involving solely Big 12 schools is this...Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Iowa State. Cecil Hurt once told me that the SEC would bide its time and pick apart the Big 12. So are those 4 likely? Maybe not, but I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility.

You could throw in Texas Tech and Oklahoma State for political reasons and I think the alignment still works.

West: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas
Central: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa State
South: Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
East: Auburn, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky

Think of this in terms of broadcast rights and time slots...

East Coast league...ACC
Southern/Midwestern league...SEC
Midwestern/Eastern league...Big Ten
Western league...PAC

Now there are numerous decent brands across the country that are good enough to form the core of 2 additional leagues that could overlap the other time zones and fill out broadcast schedules.

Western/Central league...

San Diego State, Fresno State, UNLV, BYU, Boise State, Colorado State, Air Force, New Mexico, TCU, Baylor, Houston, Kansas State

Eastern/Southern league...

UCF, USF, Tulane, SMU, Rice, Memphis, Cincinnati, West Virginia, East Carolina, Navy, Temple, UConn

If ESPN were to own the majority share of the P4 and essentially all of the latter 2 then they would pretty much have all the content that any decent number of people in this country are interested in watching.

(09-28-2016 10:32 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 01:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Now if you assume that the it isn't likely that any conference lands both Oklahoma and Texas then the SEC can logically hope to land one of them. The question then becomes who else do we take. It sure as crap isn't going to be West Virginia who tugs us down from all of our means including attendance. If the conference penchant for wanting academic upgrades is to be followed it will either be (all from the Big 12) and assuming that team #1 selected is either OU or UT, Kansas, Iowa State, or T.C.U./O.S.U. T.C.U. isn't needed if #1 is either OU or UT. O.S.U. may be required for OU but isn't wanted on its own. Between I.S.U. and Kansas we have Missouri's interest to consider and ESPN's emphasis in finishing realignment will likely be the restoration of split rivalries. That favors Kansas. Since OU will insist on OU and since Texas is grumbling about placement for minor sports, I'm leaning toward Texas and Kansas as a possible pairing for the SEC. OU's Boren will select the Big 10 & Nebraska if he can't get OSU in anywhere.

But whether I'm wrong or right about this the SEC will land either Texas or Oklahoma or we won't expand. If we land one then Kansas has a good shot.

Cincinnati is not AAU, is below the mean in attendance and athletic spending, and doesn't offer all the requisite sports. Neither did W.V.U. Iowa State would have to add baseball back. But they don't have a natural tie in with the SEC unless Kansas is here and since Kansas would be taking that slot, oh well. If the choice is OU you may as well bet OSU will be the tag-along. So if the SEC wants DFW and a new market Texas and Kansas has appeal.

There was actually an internet rumor a few months back that proclaimed Texas and Kansas were the top targets.

The SEC makes all the sense in the world for Texas. Not sure their ego will allow it, but who knows.

Kansas is a solid addition. They multiply our basketball content immensely. They along with Kentucky would be the only true basketball schools in the league. I know basketball makes up a minority of the revenue, but that's several months out of the year in which the SEC lags in exposure.

It may be true that some of our schools are capable of fielding greater basketball programs, but I honestly don't expect that to happen. I know the league has focused on it the last couple of years and there have certainly been some upgrades when it comes to coaching, but iron sharpens iron. With that said, it's hard for fans to get excited when they are not watching excellent competition. The thing that a Kentucky gives us is an excellent competitor for fans to get excited about when their team gets matched up.

We obviously don't have very many of those, but Kansas would be another. Honestly, I'd feel better about having a couple more in addition to that, but that's unlikely.

My favorite scenario involving solely Big 12 schools is this...Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Iowa State. Cecil Hurt once told me that the SEC would bide its time and pick apart the Big 12. So are those 4 likely? Maybe not, but I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility.

You could throw in Texas Tech and Oklahoma State for political reasons and I think the alignment still works.

West: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas
Central: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa State
South: Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
East: Auburn, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky

Think of this in terms of broadcast rights and time slots...

East Coast league...ACC
Southern/Midwestern league...SEC
Midwestern/Eastern league...Big Ten
Western league...PAC

Now there are numerous decent brands across the country that are good enough to form the core of 2 additional leagues that could overlap the other time zones and fill out broadcast schedules.

Western/Central league...

San Diego State, Fresno State, UNLV, BYU, Boise State, Colorado State, Air Force, New Mexico, TCU, Baylor, Houston, Kansas State

Eastern/Southern league...

UCF, USF, Tulane, SMU, Rice, Memphis, Cincinnati, West Virginia, East Carolina, Navy, Temple, UConn

If ESPN were to own the majority share of the P4 and essentially all of the latter 2 then they would pretty much have all the content that any decent number of people in this country are interested in watching.

With the four you suggest the SEC would lock down Texas, land three new states, three national brands and three AAU schools. I call that a good day!

But, the real fun would be in seeing how long it would take Iowa State to stand toe to toe with the Hawkeyes in a Big 10 state.

(09-28-2016 10:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 10:32 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 01:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Now if you assume that the it isn't likely that any conference lands both Oklahoma and Texas then the SEC can logically hope to land one of them. The question then becomes who else do we take. It sure as crap isn't going to be West Virginia who tugs us down from all of our means including attendance. If the conference penchant for wanting academic upgrades is to be followed it will either be (all from the Big 12) and assuming that team #1 selected is either OU or UT, Kansas, Iowa State, or T.C.U./O.S.U. T.C.U. isn't needed if #1 is either OU or UT. O.S.U. may be required for OU but isn't wanted on its own. Between I.S.U. and Kansas we have Missouri's interest to consider and ESPN's emphasis in finishing realignment will likely be the restoration of split rivalries. That favors Kansas. Since OU will insist on OU and since Texas is grumbling about placement for minor sports, I'm leaning toward Texas and Kansas as a possible pairing for the SEC. OU's Boren will select the Big 10 & Nebraska if he can't get OSU in anywhere.

But whether I'm wrong or right about this the SEC will land either Texas or Oklahoma or we won't expand. If we land one then Kansas has a good shot.

Cincinnati is not AAU, is below the mean in attendance and athletic spending, and doesn't offer all the requisite sports. Neither did W.V.U. Iowa State would have to add baseball back. But they don't have a natural tie in with the SEC unless Kansas is here and since Kansas would be taking that slot, oh well. If the choice is OU you may as well bet OSU will be the tag-along. So if the SEC wants DFW and a new market Texas and Kansas has appeal.

There was actually an internet rumor a few months back that proclaimed Texas and Kansas were the top targets.

The SEC makes all the sense in the world for Texas. Not sure their ego will allow it, but who knows.

Kansas is a solid addition. They multiply our basketball content immensely. They along with Kentucky would be the only true basketball schools in the league. I know basketball makes up a minority of the revenue, but that's several months out of the year in which the SEC lags in exposure.

It may be true that some of our schools are capable of fielding greater basketball programs, but I honestly don't expect that to happen. I know the league has focused on it the last couple of years and there have certainly been some upgrades when it comes to coaching, but iron sharpens iron. With that said, it's hard for fans to get excited when they are not watching excellent competition. The thing that a Kentucky gives us is an excellent competitor for fans to get excited about when their team gets matched up.

We obviously don't have very many of those, but Kansas would be another. Honestly, I'd feel better about having a couple more in addition to that, but that's unlikely.

My favorite scenario involving solely Big 12 schools is this...Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Iowa State. Cecil Hurt once told me that the SEC would bide its time and pick apart the Big 12. So are those 4 likely? Maybe not, but I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility.

You could throw in Texas Tech and Oklahoma State for political reasons and I think the alignment still works.

West: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas
Central: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa State
South: Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
East: Auburn, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky

Think of this in terms of broadcast rights and time slots...

East Coast league...ACC
Southern/Midwestern league...SEC
Midwestern/Eastern league...Big Ten
Western league...PAC

Now there are numerous decent brands across the country that are good enough to form the core of 2 additional leagues that could overlap the other time zones and fill out broadcast schedules.

Western/Central league...

San Diego State, Fresno State, UNLV, BYU, Boise State, Colorado State, Air Force, New Mexico, TCU, Baylor, Houston, Kansas State

Eastern/Southern league...

UCF, USF, Tulane, SMU, Rice, Memphis, Cincinnati, West Virginia, East Carolina, Navy, Temple, UConn

If ESPN were to own the majority share of the P4 and essentially all of the latter 2 then they would pretty much have all the content that any decent number of people in this country are interested in watching.

With the four you suggest the SEC would lock down Texas, land three new states, three national brands and three AAU schools. I call that a good day!

But, the real fun would be in seeing how long it would take Iowa State to stand toe to toe with the Hawkeyes in a Big 10 state.

The interesting thing about the Cyclones and Hawks are we are similar in talent. 247 released a full recruit composite made up every player from freshman to seniors to see what team has the most talent. The interesting thing was Iowa was #56 and Iowa state was #57 with Iowa state having more four stars than them.

Of course Iowa is one of the best schools at developing players and coaching isn't that bad. This is going to sound like a total homer pick but a lot of our talent is young and in 3-4 years we could pass the Hawks if Campbell is as good as promised. Over 60% of our snaps are by sophomores and freshman. We have some very promising freshman WRs and Jacob Park the sophomore transfer QB from Georgia throws one the most beautiful spirals I've ever seen.

We got some amazing talent coming from SEC country this season too like Kam White and Josh Johnson. The future could be good to us.

(09-28-2016 10:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 10:32 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 01:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Now if you assume that the it isn't likely that any conference lands both Oklahoma and Texas then the SEC can logically hope to land one of them. The question then becomes who else do we take. It sure as crap isn't going to be West Virginia who tugs us down from all of our means including attendance. If the conference penchant for wanting academic upgrades is to be followed it will either be (all from the Big 12) and assuming that team #1 selected is either OU or UT, Kansas, Iowa State, or T.C.U./O.S.U. T.C.U. isn't needed if #1 is either OU or UT. O.S.U. may be required for OU but isn't wanted on its own. Between I.S.U. and Kansas we have Missouri's interest to consider and ESPN's emphasis in finishing realignment will likely be the restoration of split rivalries. That favors Kansas. Since OU will insist on OU and since Texas is grumbling about placement for minor sports, I'm leaning toward Texas and Kansas as a possible pairing for the SEC. OU's Boren will select the Big 10 & Nebraska if he can't get OSU in anywhere.

But whether I'm wrong or right about this the SEC will land either Texas or Oklahoma or we won't expand. If we land one then Kansas has a good shot.

Cincinnati is not AAU, is below the mean in attendance and athletic spending, and doesn't offer all the requisite sports. Neither did W.V.U. Iowa State would have to add baseball back. But they don't have a natural tie in with the SEC unless Kansas is here and since Kansas would be taking that slot, oh well. If the choice is OU you may as well bet OSU will be the tag-along. So if the SEC wants DFW and a new market Texas and Kansas has appeal.

There was actually an internet rumor a few months back that proclaimed Texas and Kansas were the top targets.

The SEC makes all the sense in the world for Texas. Not sure their ego will allow it, but who knows.

Kansas is a solid addition. They multiply our basketball content immensely. They along with Kentucky would be the only true basketball schools in the league. I know basketball makes up a minority of the revenue, but that's several months out of the year in which the SEC lags in exposure.

It may be true that some of our schools are capable of fielding greater basketball programs, but I honestly don't expect that to happen. I know the league has focused on it the last couple of years and there have certainly been some upgrades when it comes to coaching, but iron sharpens iron. With that said, it's hard for fans to get excited when they are not watching excellent competition. The thing that a Kentucky gives us is an excellent competitor for fans to get excited about when their team gets matched up.

We obviously don't have very many of those, but Kansas would be another. Honestly, I'd feel better about having a couple more in addition to that, but that's unlikely.

My favorite scenario involving solely Big 12 schools is this...Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and Iowa State. Cecil Hurt once told me that the SEC would bide its time and pick apart the Big 12. So are those 4 likely? Maybe not, but I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility.

You could throw in Texas Tech and Oklahoma State for political reasons and I think the alignment still works.

West: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas
Central: Texas A&M, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa State
South: Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
East: Auburn, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky

Think of this in terms of broadcast rights and time slots...

East Coast league...ACC
Southern/Midwestern league...SEC
Midwestern/Eastern league...Big Ten
Western league...PAC

Now there are numerous decent brands across the country that are good enough to form the core of 2 additional leagues that could overlap the other time zones and fill out broadcast schedules.

Western/Central league...

San Diego State, Fresno State, UNLV, BYU, Boise State, Colorado State, Air Force, New Mexico, TCU, Baylor, Houston, Kansas State

Eastern/Southern league...

UCF, USF, Tulane, SMU, Rice, Memphis, Cincinnati, West Virginia, East Carolina, Navy, Temple, UConn

If ESPN were to own the majority share of the P4 and essentially all of the latter 2 then they would pretty much have all the content that any decent number of people in this country are interested in watching.

With the four you suggest the SEC would lock down Texas, land three new states, three national brands and three AAU schools. I call that a good day!

But, the real fun would be in seeing how long it would take Iowa State to stand toe to toe with the Hawkeyes in a Big 10 state.

We'd certainly have to wait until the end of the GOR, but I think the question is just how powerful is ESPN compared to FOX?

I don't see the B1G doubling down in Iowa under any circumstances. I could see them taking Kansas, but there really isn't a great option for a 2nd unless Oklahoma or Texas is the first pick. Kansas and UConn maybe, but the B1G's new contract makes that unlikely as the threshold is pretty high now.

I don't see Texas going to the B1G for a few reasons. I could see Oklahoma, but who knows if it works out that way.

The ACC probably doesn't want to fool with branching out into that part of the country. The PAC would love to, but they can't pay as much to the big brands.

ESPN should have an opportunity to land those 4.

(09-28-2016 03:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(09-28-2016 03:15 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 05:41 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 09:02 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  This could work

LSU would certainly be in favor of it. The MS schools would object.

I know the MS schools value their games with the Alabama schools and Kentucky/Vandy. The old SEC rivalries were truly screwy, at least from my perspective.

With this lineup at least, we could finally do away with permanent cross overs

Look, I have no animosity for either of the Mississippi schools but their games with Auburn and Alabama do not even compare with Alabama / Tennessee & Auburn Georgia. But what people forget is that Auburn until '91 Auburn played Tennessee, Florida and Georgia every year. The East was essentially our home division.

Any additions from the Big 12 need to be added to the West and Missouri needs to move West and Auburn and Alabama to the East. Then absolutely end the permanent rivals.

I agree

Man, the new East would absolutely be murderers row most years though.

In SCs case, I can only imagine having to play Bama, Aub, UT, UF, UGA, and Clemson every year with some combination of the Western schools sprinkled in for good measure.