(09-16-2018 06:19 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote: (09-16-2018 03:57 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote: (09-13-2018 11:56 PM)JRsec Wrote: (09-13-2018 11:50 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote: (09-13-2018 04:22 PM)JRsec Wrote: People from Iowa would be right at home in Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi and Alabama. We are all still states that are predominantly rural and agricultural. Vet Med and Ag Science in a addition to the other disciplines would actually blend quite well. And culturally, other than the lack of a Southern drawl, Iowans are still conservative church going folks.
IMO the biggest obstacle to adding the Cyclones is distance.
They finished the 2017 season 3rd in Big XII attendance and 30th in the nation at 58.000. They have spent a lot of money on upgrades. Travel may not be a problem, as the fans have to travel to Austin, Lubbock, Waco, and Dallas anyway. My thinking is a road trip to the south might be a bit more exciting for a weekend. Their fans will have to run the culture gauntlet which is no fun.
Explain the culture gauntlet.
They will be probably labeled by many as a non-SEC fit, just as Missouri was. I know Iowa is similar to the SEC states in many ways, but there are always some who will constantly make the ISU fans defend the right to be a part of the SEC. Kansas will face the same music. Not sure about how the ISU and KU alumni feel about this option either. I hope everyone can overcome cultural stereotypes and keep an open mind. Simple geography is not that important. Example: Liberal minded UT Austin is a west coast school in every way except location. That was my point.
Couldn't agree more, Medic. I think we see more of the ignorant sort of regionalism pop up among fans who may have never explored opportunities outside of their particular sub-culture, and the more vocal ones tend to be what we call the T-shirt fans who pull for SEC schools like pro sports. In other words, they have no academic or alumni relations to the schools they root for, so they just hate on other schools like what happens in pro sports.
Missouri is such a historically rich and interesting part of our nation. A book called American Nations written several years ago by Colin Woodard suggests that America is truly 11 rival nations that does its best to continually become the United States of America. I do not agree with all of his conclusions, but it is a fascinating read nonetheless. Missouri's ability to gel with what Woodard would call the Deep South, Greater Appalachia, The Midlands, and Yankeedom is a rare gift.
I've been to 47 of the 48 contiguous, lived in Washington, Michigan, Georgia, Florida, Texas, Canada, and Alabama. I've learned to appreciate the differences and find things irritating about all of them. For the most part people are still pretty good wherever you go. The problem with our culture today is that there is way too much tolerance for the intolerant on the fringes be they left or right. Ignorance is now called culture and celebrated as surely as participation trophies are handed out at little league and Pee Wee football. What we have lost by trying to acquiesce to everyone are our norming norms that once identified what it meant to be an American regardless of subculture and the lack of those norms are tearing us apart and bullying has replaced healthy debate. That recipe has inevitably led to violence in every society that has permitted that kind of dissipation.
There's nothing wrong with regionalism. But the issue with conference realignment is that we have not been permitted to grow regionally. Our organization is what appeals to those who pay us, the networks are the ones who want growth by market demographic, instead of region, and whose objective is the blurring of regional boundaries which is an intentional ploy to try to generate interest for a regional product in two or more historically different regions than the core product identifies with naturally.
With that regard, Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas not only accomplish that objective, but help to maximize its effect.
As to what Medic has identified my reply is that Missouri has suffered inordinately because they essentially are the only old Big 8 school who came along. In that regard Arkansas took a long time to integrate after being the only SWC member here until A&M arrived.
To understand my interest in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and possibly Iowa State is to understand what it will take to essentially merge three distinct historical regions into one super interest generating conference.
The old SWC has the second highest viewer saturation numbers. That market is dominated by essentially two P5 schools Texas and A&M and it actually takes both to dominate it in a way where the highest ad rates are assured. Texas Tech would give you a monopoly on State schools in Texas but they aren't necessary to dominate the advertising rates.
Oklahoma, Kansas, and Missouri give you the heart of the Old Big 8 minus Nebraska. Outside of Oklahoma the viewing saturation numbers drop off significantly. Part of that decline however was due to Colorado heading West, Nebraska heading North, and Missouri heading Southeast.
Assemble the core of the flagships minus Nebraska and you recapture the bulk of the viewership from the Old Big 8 without having to have but 4 of the schools. It's enough familiarity to become a division sub region when coupled with the old SWC schools.
Having several familiar faces on the schedule will help any school assimilate. In 30 years the fan base of each will only remember the SEC.
It's true that taking Clemson and Florida State would require very little assimilation because they are Southeastern schools already. But it's also true that their impact upon the SEC outside of obvious content value and in the case of F.S.U. giving us the highest ad rate in Florida in perpetuity, is partially limited because they already share much of our market with us. Kansas and Iowa State only add 7.2 million between them, but tie them into Oklahoma and Missouri and the synergy will drive much greater interest in the region. That's where we can add some value.
If we moved to 18 with those additions then one day moving to 20 with Clemson and Florida State, or North Carolina and Virginia Tech would make sense not only geographically but also in terms of market saturation and content.
So while I'm a purist and would rather see the SEC simply take F.S.U. and Clemson and quit, I'm also aware that expanding our markets to pull in what had been two distinct regions by acquiring schools they historically identify with creates a much broader financial vista.
So if we ever move to 18 and can do so by adding flagships and AAU schools with Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Iowa State, I'm open to it.
If we are to limit it to just 18 then we would be wise to add Texas and Oklahoma to maximize the regional interest in Arkansas and A&M and to a lesser extent Missouri.
Should Vanderbilt seek to be with other private peers in the ACC then IMO, Texas, Kansas, and Oklahoma accomplish the majority of what the 4 would have given us, and do so without dividing the pie further, but while accomplishing the sub regional interest goals. I think that would be the greatest win win of all considerations.
/
At 18 SEC Members Which 4 from the Big 12 Do You Prefer Now:
