This seems like a crazy concept at first glance, but inadvertently, these two Southern Ivies made a huge impact on conference realignment. Both programs left the SEC in the mid 60s but had they stayed, I think they would have changed the course of realignment in the early 90s and beyond.

First, if GT is (somewhat) content in the SEC, they aren’t joining the ACC in 1979. This is somewhat speculative but I think that if GT isn’t on the market the ACC instead reunites with South Carolina after an 8 yr absence. I think there had been some talk of adding the Gamecocks and Yellow Jackets in the late 70s but it came down to Tobacco Road not wanting to have to divide basketball tournament ticket distributions 9 ways rather than 8.

Fast forward to 1990. In the December prior Penn St just announced they were going to the Big 10 and that sent ripples across the conference landscape. The SEC quietly drew up various expansion models with the purpose of defensive posturing as well as to take advantage of the little known CCG rule for conferences with 12 or more members (thanks D2 PSAC). At this point the SEC already has 12 members so they don’t need to expand to host a CCG. They also have to be very careful in selecting expansion members—2 puts them at 14; 4 a whopping 16; 6 would mean an unfathomable 18! I don’t think they have the luxury of adding Arkansas in hopes that it will get them Texas or TAMU or Arkansas. On the eastern front, in the ACC still secures Florida St, then both Clemson and SC are happy. I don’t think anyone joins the SEC in 1990.

This of course, would have repercussions on the SWC and Big 8 and truthfully, I’m not entirely sure how it pans out. The SWC is top heavy but then you’ve got politically influential programs like Tech and Baylor making it hard for the flagships to move. I could see things going a few different ways:

Arkansas getting Baylor’s Big 12 spot

Texas & TAMU lobbying for Tech, Baylor, & Arkansas (with BYU to round things out) in the Big 14

Texas & TAMU join different leagues, with each bringing some of the baggage (TAMU & Arkansas to the SEC/Texas & Colorado to the PAC 10?)

The SWC and Big 8 persist as separate leagues through the 90s and into the 2000s

In the ACC and Big East world, perhaps very little changes, aside from the ACC now having 2 SC schools and none in GA. I think their realignment history goes relatively unchanged.

In the Midwest, a weaker Big 8 or a more heavily Austin-centric Big 14 could mean a more disgruntled Nebraska.

This version of the SEC, with the Yellow Jackets and Green Wave probably isn’t quite as strong or as valuable, but definitely still one of the very strongest.

———
Regardless of how the 90s play out, it definitely obfuscates the path that things take in the 2010s and subsequently the 2020s.

What are your thoughts on an SEC that kept GT and Tulane?

(04-18-2023 03:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Arkansas getting Baylor’s Big 12 spot

Frank Broyles felt that Arkansas would get left out due to Texas politics, and they'd have ended up in CUSA basically. I just don't see it, but that's what the guy that was in charge felt like.

I think when it comes down to it, the Big 8 schools would have just told Texas and A&M that there was only one additional spot. So I think Baylor is the odd man out and probably goes to the WAC-16, which leaves Tulsa out, I'd think.

So maybe Tulsa joins the original CUSA?

(04-18-2023 03:45 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 03:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Arkansas getting Baylor’s Big 12 spot

Frank Broyles felt that Arkansas would get left out due to Texas politics, and they'd have ended up in CUSA basically. I just don't see it, but that's what the guy that was in charge felt like.

I think when it comes down to it, the Big 8 schools would have just told Texas and A&M that there was only one additional spot. So I think Baylor is the odd man out and probably goes to the WAC-16, which leaves Tulsa out, I'd think.

So maybe Tulsa joins the original CUSA?

I agree with you—if Baylor is left out of the Big 12, they get included in the WAC-16 and Tulsa doesn’t.

C-USA doesn’t have Tulane, so I suppose Tulsa could have their spot:

Houston
Tulsa
USM
Memphis
Louisville
Cincinnati
Army (fb only)
ECU (fb only)
UAB
USF
Charlotte
DePaul
Marquette
St Louis

The SEC could still have gone with the 4 western targets. Arkansas, Texas, A&M, and Oklahoma. The academics line would have been even less believable with Tulane at Georgia Tech.
West-Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Arkansas, LSU, Tulane, Ole Miss, and MSU
East-Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt, and Kentucky.
With the bolded schools together, we might not need permanent cross division opponents.

(04-18-2023 03:45 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 03:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Arkansas getting Baylor’s Big 12 spot

Frank Broyles felt that Arkansas would get left out due to Texas politics, and they'd have ended up in CUSA basically. I just don't see it, but that's what the guy that was in charge felt like.

I think when it comes down to it, the Big 8 schools would have just told Texas and A&M that there was only one additional spot. So I think Baylor is the odd man out and probably goes to the WAC-16, which leaves Tulsa out, I'd think.

So maybe Tulsa joins the original CUSA?

Frank Broyles inquired the Big 8 in the 70s and it didn't go anywhere, so it was probably a safe assumption. Once the SEC came to him for membership in 87, we were all in.

(04-18-2023 04:30 PM)Porcine Wrote:  The SEC could still have gone with the 4 western targets. Arkansas, Texas, A&M, and Oklahoma. The academics line would have been even less believable with Tulane at Georgia Tech.
West-Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Arkansas, LSU, Tulane, Ole Miss, and MSU
East-Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt, and Kentucky.
With the bolded schools together, we might not need permanent cross division opponents.

I agree that they could still try to land those 4 western targets but they aren’t going to take Arkansas unless they get one of the others too.

Going all in with Western schools would mean giving up pursuit of FSU in the East.

For Arkansas to join the SEC in 1990, landing TAMU or one of the others HAS to be a sure thing and for that to be a sure thing Texas has to be going somewhere the Horns find desirable. In 2011, Texas was ok with TAMU going out on their own because Texas had their LHN money. Texas has to get something they feel is equivalent to the Aggies.

(04-18-2023 05:12 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 04:30 PM)Porcine Wrote:  The SEC could still have gone with the 4 western targets. Arkansas, Texas, A&M, and Oklahoma. The academics line would have been even less believable with Tulane at Georgia Tech.
West-Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Arkansas, LSU, Tulane, Ole Miss, and MSU
East-Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt, and Kentucky.
With the bolded schools together, we might not need permanent cross division opponents.

I agree that they could still try to land those 4 western targets but they aren’t going to take Arkansas unless they get one of the others too.

Going all in with Western schools would mean giving up pursuit of FSU in the East.

For Arkansas to join the SEC in 1990, landing TAMU or one of the others HAS to be a sure thing and for that to be a sure thing Texas has to be going somewhere the Horns find desirable. In 2011, Texas was ok with TAMU going out on their own because Texas had their LHN money. Texas has to get something they feel is equivalent to the Aggies.

Wrong. Arkansas was a hog in 1990. it was a bigger brand than LSU, Georgia or Florida at the time and maybe Tennessee.

(04-18-2023 04:43 PM)Porcine Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 03:45 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 03:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Arkansas getting Baylor’s Big 12 spot

Frank Broyles felt that Arkansas would get left out due to Texas politics, and they'd have ended up in CUSA basically. I just don't see it, but that's what the guy that was in charge felt like.

I think when it comes down to it, the Big 8 schools would have just told Texas and A&M that there was only one additional spot. So I think Baylor is the odd man out and probably goes to the WAC-16, which leaves Tulsa out, I'd think.

So maybe Tulsa joins the original CUSA?

Frank Broyles inquired the Big 8 in the 70s and it didn't go anywhere, so it was probably a safe assumption. Once the SEC came to him for membership in 87, we were all in.

And Arkansas's patience with realignment in the SEC finally paid off handsomely. The Hogs, in part because of Broyles, was a no brainer in 1990-2's additions. South Carolina has been a decent state pick up and solidly in the middle of the SEC with a push up in various sports whether baseball, football, or hoops (mostly women's) since joining. The SEC got 2 solid additions which served, or will serve to expand connections.

I don't see any scenario in which Arkansas is not an addition, and only Clemson joining instead of South Carolina would have made their outcome different. Tulane and Georgia Tech simply would have made any Florida additions for the ACC difficult. Georgia Tech is what made FSU possible as well as Miami.

IF the SEC is sitting at 12 (Tulane and Georgia Tech) and adds South Carolina and Arkansas then the Florida schools both say yes to the SEC.

At 16 the SEC sits strong until 2012:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Tulane
Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, Mississippi State
Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Then in 2012 perhaps we get the following:
Clemson, Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas A&M to move to 20.

Now the SEC looks like this:
Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M, Tulane
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State
Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Clemson, Kentucky, Miami, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Meanwhile the ACC could have grown North and with Louisville into the Northern Midwest:

Boston College, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, Missouri
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

The Big 10 still expands with Maryland, Nebraska and Rutgers around 2012. Maybe they make a run at Kansas and Missouri before the ACC can take them, maybe? They didn't when they had the chance.

The PAC 12 would have stayed at 12.

The Big 12 would have been comprised of Baylor, Houston, S.M.U., T.C.U., Texas Tech, and some MWC schools and AAC schools.

But I digressed. Arkansas would have been in the SEC anyway, and likely South Carolina as well. So nothing changes except for Florida expansion is much easier for the SEC because they are two states away from North Carolina.

(04-18-2023 05:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 04:43 PM)Porcine Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 03:45 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 03:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Arkansas getting Baylor’s Big 12 spot

Frank Broyles felt that Arkansas would get left out due to Texas politics, and they'd have ended up in CUSA basically. I just don't see it, but that's what the guy that was in charge felt like.

I think when it comes down to it, the Big 8 schools would have just told Texas and A&M that there was only one additional spot. So I think Baylor is the odd man out and probably goes to the WAC-16, which leaves Tulsa out, I'd think.

So maybe Tulsa joins the original CUSA?

Frank Broyles inquired the Big 8 in the 70s and it didn't go anywhere, so it was probably a safe assumption. Once the SEC came to him for membership in 87, we were all in.

And Arkansas's patience with realignment in the SEC finally paid off handsomely. The Hogs, in part because of Broyles, was a no brainer in 1990-2's additions. South Carolina has been a decent state pick up and solidly in the middle of the SEC with a push up in various sports whether baseball, football, or hoops (mostly women's) since joining. The SEC got 2 solid additions which served, or will serve to expand connections.

I don't see any scenario in which Arkansas is not an addition, and only Clemson joining instead of South Carolina would have made their outcome different. Tulane and Georgia Tech simply would have made any Florida additions for the ACC difficult. Georgia Tech is what made FSU possible as well as Miami.

IF the SEC is sitting at 12 (Tulane and Georgia Tech) and adds South Carolina and Arkansas then the Florida schools both say yes to the SEC.

At 16 the SEC sits strong until 2012:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Tulane
Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, Mississippi State
Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Then in 2012 perhaps we get the following:
Clemson, Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas A&M to move to 20.

Now the SEC looks like this:
Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M, Tulane
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State
Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Clemson, Kentucky, Miami, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Meanwhile the ACC could have grown North and with Louisville into the Northern Midwest:

Boston College, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, Missouri
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

The Big 10 still expands with Maryland, Nebraska and Rutgers around 2012. Maybe they make a run at Kansas and Missouri before the ACC can take them, maybe? They didn't when they had the chance.

The PAC 12 would have stayed at 12.

The Big 12 would have been comprised of Baylor, Houston, S.M.U., T.C.U., Texas Tech, and some MWC schools and AAC schools.

But I digressed. Arkansas would have been in the SEC anyway, and likely South Carolina as well. So nothing changes except for Florida expansion is much easier for the SEC because they are two states away from North Carolina.

What if the ACC, instead of expanding into the Midwest, they expand into the Northeast, and they end up with this lineup:

North

Boston College
Maryland
Penn State
Pittsburgh
Rutgers
Syracuse
Temple
West Virginia

South

Duke
Clemson
North Carolina
NC State
South Carolina
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest

(04-18-2023 05:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 04:43 PM)Porcine Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 03:45 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 03:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Arkansas getting Baylor’s Big 12 spot

Frank Broyles felt that Arkansas would get left out due to Texas politics, and they'd have ended up in CUSA basically. I just don't see it, but that's what the guy that was in charge felt like.

I think when it comes down to it, the Big 8 schools would have just told Texas and A&M that there was only one additional spot. So I think Baylor is the odd man out and probably goes to the WAC-16, which leaves Tulsa out, I'd think.

So maybe Tulsa joins the original CUSA?

Frank Broyles inquired the Big 8 in the 70s and it didn't go anywhere, so it was probably a safe assumption. Once the SEC came to him for membership in 87, we were all in.

And Arkansas's patience with realignment in the SEC finally paid off handsomely. The Hogs, in part because of Broyles, was a no brainer in 1990-2's additions. South Carolina has been a decent state pick up and solidly in the middle of the SEC with a push up in various sports whether baseball, football, or hoops (mostly women's) since joining. The SEC got 2 solid additions which served, or will serve to expand connections.

I don't see any scenario in which Arkansas is not an addition, and only Clemson joining instead of South Carolina would have made their outcome different. Tulane and Georgia Tech simply would have made any Florida additions for the ACC difficult. Georgia Tech is what made FSU possible as well as Miami.

IF the SEC is sitting at 12 (Tulane and Georgia Tech) and adds South Carolina and Arkansas then the Florida schools both say yes to the SEC.

At 16 the SEC sits strong until 2012:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Tulane
Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, Mississippi State
Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Then in 2012 perhaps we get the following:
Clemson, Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas A&M to move to 20.

Now the SEC looks like this:
Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M, Tulane
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State
Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Clemson, Kentucky, Miami, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Meanwhile the ACC could have grown North and with Louisville into the Northern Midwest:

Boston College, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, Missouri
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

The Big 10 still expands with Maryland, Nebraska and Rutgers around 2012. Maybe they make a run at Kansas and Missouri before the ACC can take them, maybe? They didn't when they had the chance.

The PAC 12 would have stayed at 12.

The Big 12 would have been comprised of Baylor, Houston, S.M.U., T.C.U., Texas Tech, and some MWC schools and AAC schools.

But I digressed. Arkansas would have been in the SEC anyway, and likely South Carolina as well. So nothing changes except for Florida expansion is much easier for the SEC because they are two states away from North Carolina.

I’m working from the presumption that SC isn’t available in 1990–they’ve returned to the ACC in 1979, and much like Clemson, they see the Florida St as a football-strengthening move and are content where they are.

The SEC would need someone else to pair with Arkansas if they indeed wanted to make Arkansas their #13. The SEC would need to get a SWC school, Oklahoma, or a desirable Southern Indy to join.

I’m not convinced the SEC is gutsy enough to do 14 or 16 in 1990. Those are some uncharted waters. Weren’t they also only doing 7 conference games? That’s along time to go without seeing a team from the other division. With space at a premium, I just don’t see them running the risk of having to settle for a filler school.

(04-18-2023 05:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 04:43 PM)Porcine Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 03:45 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 03:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Arkansas getting Baylor’s Big 12 spot

Frank Broyles felt that Arkansas would get left out due to Texas politics, and they'd have ended up in CUSA basically. I just don't see it, but that's what the guy that was in charge felt like.

I think when it comes down to it, the Big 8 schools would have just told Texas and A&M that there was only one additional spot. So I think Baylor is the odd man out and probably goes to the WAC-16, which leaves Tulsa out, I'd think.

So maybe Tulsa joins the original CUSA?

Frank Broyles inquired the Big 8 in the 70s and it didn't go anywhere, so it was probably a safe assumption. Once the SEC came to him for membership in 87, we were all in.

And Arkansas's patience with realignment in the SEC finally paid off handsomely. The Hogs, in part because of Broyles, was a no brainer in 1990-2's additions. South Carolina has been a decent state pick up and solidly in the middle of the SEC with a push up in various sports whether baseball, football, or hoops (mostly women's) since joining. The SEC got 2 solid additions which served, or will serve to expand connections.

I don't see any scenario in which Arkansas is not an addition, and only Clemson joining instead of South Carolina would have made their outcome different. Tulane and Georgia Tech simply would have made any Florida additions for the ACC difficult. Georgia Tech is what made FSU possible as well as Miami.

IF the SEC is sitting at 12 (Tulane and Georgia Tech) and adds South Carolina and Arkansas then the Florida schools both say yes to the SEC.

At 16 the SEC sits strong until 2012:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Tulane
Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, Mississippi State
Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Then in 2012 perhaps we get the following:
Clemson, Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas A&M to move to 20.

Now the SEC looks like this:
Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M, Tulane
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State
Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Clemson, Kentucky, Miami, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Meanwhile the ACC could have grown North and with Louisville into the Northern Midwest:

Boston College, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, Missouri
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

The Big 10 still expands with Maryland, Nebraska and Rutgers around 2012. Maybe they make a run at Kansas and Missouri before the ACC can take them, maybe? They didn't when they had the chance.

The PAC 12 would have stayed at 12.

The Big 12 would have been comprised of Baylor, Houston, S.M.U., T.C.U., Texas Tech, and some MWC schools and AAC schools.

But I digressed. Arkansas would have been in the SEC anyway, and likely South Carolina as well. So nothing changes except for Florida expansion is much easier for the SEC because they are two states away from North Carolina.

If I’m following your logic, GT was the ACC’s gateway into Florida. If Florida St was the real Eastern prize and space was at a minimum wouldn’t the SEC ignore the Palmetto State and take Florida St and Arkansas for their 14? Florida St supposedly had agreed to join the SEC in principle but then the ACC swept in at the last minute—that last minute switch probably isn’t happening now.

That gives you:

UK, Tenn, Vandy, GT, UGA, UF, FSU
Auburn, Bama, Ole Miss, Miss St, LSU, Tulane, Arkansas

The ACC takes Miami for 9 and then they pull in VT, BC, and Syracuse 14 years later.

The loss of Arkansas definitely would put pressure on Texas and Texas A&M but if they’ve got Tech and Baylor as baggage, I think we get the same Big 12 line up.

(04-18-2023 06:44 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 05:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 04:43 PM)Porcine Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 03:45 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 03:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Arkansas getting Baylor’s Big 12 spot

Frank Broyles felt that Arkansas would get left out due to Texas politics, and they'd have ended up in CUSA basically. I just don't see it, but that's what the guy that was in charge felt like.

I think when it comes down to it, the Big 8 schools would have just told Texas and A&M that there was only one additional spot. So I think Baylor is the odd man out and probably goes to the WAC-16, which leaves Tulsa out, I'd think.

So maybe Tulsa joins the original CUSA?

Frank Broyles inquired the Big 8 in the 70s and it didn't go anywhere, so it was probably a safe assumption. Once the SEC came to him for membership in 87, we were all in.

And Arkansas's patience with realignment in the SEC finally paid off handsomely. The Hogs, in part because of Broyles, was a no brainer in 1990-2's additions. South Carolina has been a decent state pick up and solidly in the middle of the SEC with a push up in various sports whether baseball, football, or hoops (mostly women's) since joining. The SEC got 2 solid additions which served, or will serve to expand connections.

I don't see any scenario in which Arkansas is not an addition, and only Clemson joining instead of South Carolina would have made their outcome different. Tulane and Georgia Tech simply would have made any Florida additions for the ACC difficult. Georgia Tech is what made FSU possible as well as Miami.

IF the SEC is sitting at 12 (Tulane and Georgia Tech) and adds South Carolina and Arkansas then the Florida schools both say yes to the SEC.

At 16 the SEC sits strong until 2012:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Tulane
Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, Mississippi State
Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Then in 2012 perhaps we get the following:
Clemson, Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas A&M to move to 20.

Now the SEC looks like this:
Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M, Tulane
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State
Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Clemson, Kentucky, Miami, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Meanwhile the ACC could have grown North and with Louisville into the Northern Midwest:

Boston College, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, Missouri
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

The Big 10 still expands with Maryland, Nebraska and Rutgers around 2012. Maybe they make a run at Kansas and Missouri before the ACC can take them, maybe? They didn't when they had the chance.

The PAC 12 would have stayed at 12.

The Big 12 would have been comprised of Baylor, Houston, S.M.U., T.C.U., Texas Tech, and some MWC schools and AAC schools.

But I digressed. Arkansas would have been in the SEC anyway, and likely South Carolina as well. So nothing changes except for Florida expansion is much easier for the SEC because they are two states away from North Carolina.

I’m working from the presumption that SC isn’t available in 1990–they’ve returned to the ACC in 1979, and much like Clemson, they see the Florida St as a football-strengthening move and are content where they are.

The SEC would need someone else to pair with Arkansas if they indeed wanted to make Arkansas their #13. The SEC would need to get a SWC school, Oklahoma, or a desirable Southern Indy to join.

I’m not convinced the SEC is gutsy enough to do 14 or 16 in 1990. Those are some uncharted waters. Weren’t they also only doing 7 conference games? That’s along time to go without seeing a team from the other division. With space at a premium, I just don’t see them running the risk of having to settle for a filler school.

1. I missed your precondition on South Carolina.
2. The SEC planned to go to 16 in 1990. We have 4 of them now, Arkansas, Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma all of whom were in discussions in 1990. Clemson was the one originally spoken with in 1990, South Carolina happened when a Clemson Trustee who knew they weren't taking the bid called a buddy in the same position at South Carolina and they applied. Florida State would have come on board under these conditions, and Miami likely would have as well.
3. No matter what the SEC was angling for Texas (the state) as a #1 priority.
4. Also applying to the SEC in 1990 were West Virginia and Virginia Tech was inquiring. T.C.U. had talked with the SEC as well. But no South Carolina or Clemson and we are looking at Kansas or Oklahoma State.

I’m not sure the conference championship game ever would have passed if the SEC had already been at 12 teams. They passed the rule to help the Division II PSAC. I’m not sure the NCAA would have allowed conference championship games if they had known the championship games would become money making enterprises for FBS conferences.

(04-18-2023 07:55 PM)Poster Wrote:  I’m not sure the conference championship game ever would have passed if the SEC had already been at 12 teams. They passed the rule to help the Division II PSAC. I’m not sure the NCAA would have allowed conference championship games if they had known the championship games would become money making enterprises for FBS conferences.

That’s an interesting thought. Surely when they passed it though they had to realize that the big leagues might consider growing to reach 12. It hadn’t been that long (SoCon 1952, SEC 1964) that there was a major league that big. 3 of the 6 were already at 10.

(04-18-2023 08:04 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 07:55 PM)Poster Wrote:  I’m not sure the conference championship game ever would have passed if the SEC had already been at 12 teams. They passed the rule to help the Division II PSAC. I’m not sure the NCAA would have allowed conference championship games if they had known the championship games would become money making enterprises for FBS conferences.

That’s an interesting thought. Surely when they passed it though they had to realize that the big leagues might consider growing to reach 12. It hadn’t been that long (SoCon 1952, SEC 1964) that there was a major league that big. 3 of the 6 were already at 10.

Oklahoma/Georgia vs the NCAA essentially ended NCAA control over football period. The issue was it took the presidents and commissioners to realize how far reaching that loss of control was. So the only relevant question would be, "Will Roy Kramer insist on a playoff at 12?" Yes. The rule was still on the books and the NCAA takes a long time to adapt to anything. The second question would have been, "Will Roy Kramer seek expansion anyway?" Yes.

Tulane and Georgia Tech didn't enhance the SEC footprint. Why did the SWC breakup? Because they only had 2 states in the conference footprint. Why would the Big 8 break up? Because they only had 6. The SEC may well have still gone for Florida State, but they would definitely moved on Arkansas, Texas, and Texas A&M, and if those had come along so too would Oklahoma. The question then would have been Oklahoma State or Miami. In 1990 Oklahoma State wasn't anything like they would be in 2012. It would have been Miami. The SEC presidents in 1990-2 and in 2010-2 still hand branding and fit as a high priority. New markets would have been Arkansas and Texas, which is essentially adding the market value of the whole SWC with 3 schools. Oklahoma would have been a plus, and owning Florida outright would have meant more ad money even in 1992.

It took a Vandy feller to take over college football. The SEC won’t soon forget that.

(04-18-2023 04:30 PM)Porcine Wrote:  The SEC could still have gone with the 4 western targets. Arkansas, Texas, A&M, and Oklahoma. The academics line would have been even less believable with Tulane at Georgia Tech.
West-Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Arkansas, LSU, Tulane, Ole Miss, and MSU
East-Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt, and Kentucky.
With the bolded schools together, we might not need permanent cross division opponents.

If Texas was going anywhere before 2011, it was the Pac. After that they looked at the ACC and B1G before finally deciding that they couldn't compete with A&M unless they joined us in the SEC. Back in 1990 or 2000? Texas and CU to the Pac, A&M and Arkansas to the SEC. Nebraska to the B1G. The big 8 and SWC leftovers merge and form the nbig 12 about 20 years earlier than it came about, with a few notable changes:

Missouri is still in the big 12
SMU is in the big 12
Rice? probably not in the big 12 but perhaps

(04-18-2023 11:29 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 04:30 PM)Porcine Wrote:  The SEC could still have gone with the 4 western targets. Arkansas, Texas, A&M, and Oklahoma. The academics line would have been even less believable with Tulane at Georgia Tech.
West-Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Arkansas, LSU, Tulane, Ole Miss, and MSU
East-Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt, and Kentucky.
With the bolded schools together, we might not need permanent cross division opponents.

If Texas was going anywhere before 2011, it was the Pac. After that they looked at the ACC and B1G before finally deciding that they couldn't compete with A&M unless they joined us in the SEC. Back in 1990 or 2000? Texas and CU to the Pac, A&M and Arkansas to the SEC. Nebraska to the B1G. The big 8 and SWC leftovers merge and form the nbig 12 about 20 years earlier than it came about, with a few notable changes:

Missouri is still in the big 12
SMU is in the big 12
Rice? probably not in the big 12 but perhaps

A sincere Aggie perspective, but not reflective of the discussions between the schools in 1990-2, nor reflective of conversations which continued with Texas regularly thereafter. A&M can take great pride in being the trailblazer, but the process was 30 years in the making, not 10.

(04-18-2023 03:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  This seems like a crazy concept at first glance, but inadvertently, these two Southern Ivies made a huge impact on conference realignment. Both programs left the SEC in the mid 60s but had they stayed, I think they would have changed the course of realignment in the early 90s and beyond.

First, if GT is (somewhat) content in the SEC, they aren’t joining the ACC in 1979. This is somewhat speculative but I think that if GT isn’t on the market the ACC instead reunites with South Carolina after an 8 yr absence. I think there had been some talk of adding the Gamecocks and Yellow Jackets in the late 70s but it came down to Tobacco Road not wanting to have to divide basketball tournament ticket distributions 9 ways rather than 8.

Fast forward to 1990. In the December prior Penn St just announced they were going to the Big 10 and that sent ripples across the conference landscape. The SEC quietly drew up various expansion models with the purpose of defensive posturing as well as to take advantage of the little known CCG rule for conferences with 12 or more members (thanks D2 PSAC). At this point the SEC already has 12 members so they don’t need to expand to host a CCG. They also have to be very careful in selecting expansion members—2 puts them at 14; 4 a whopping 16; 6 would mean an unfathomable 18! I don’t think they have the luxury of adding Arkansas in hopes that it will get them Texas or TAMU or Arkansas. On the eastern front, in the ACC still secures Florida St, then both Clemson and SC are happy. I don’t think anyone joins the SEC in 1990.

This of course, would have repercussions on the SWC and Big 8 and truthfully, I’m not entirely sure how it pans out. The SWC is top heavy but then you’ve got politically influential programs like Tech and Baylor making it hard for the flagships to move. I could see things going a few different ways:

Arkansas getting Baylor’s Big 12 spot

Texas & TAMU lobbying for Tech, Baylor, & Arkansas (with BYU to round things out) in the Big 14

Texas & TAMU join different leagues, with each bringing some of the baggage (TAMU & Arkansas to the SEC/Texas & Colorado to the PAC 10?)

The SWC and Big 8 persist as separate leagues through the 90s and into the 2000s

In the ACC and Big East world, perhaps very little changes, aside from the ACC now having 2 SC schools and none in GA. I think their realignment history goes relatively unchanged.

In the Midwest, a weaker Big 8 or a more heavily Austin-centric Big 14 could mean a more disgruntled Nebraska.

This version of the SEC, with the Yellow Jackets and Green Wave probably isn’t quite as strong or as valuable, but definitely still one of the very strongest.

———
Regardless of how the 90s play out, it definitely obfuscates the path that things take in the 2010s and subsequently the 2020s.

What are your thoughts on an SEC that kept GT and Tulane?

Would Georgia Tech, Tulane, and Vanderbilt have changed the whole spirit of the conference? It would have given the SEC two schools in every state except Kentucky and Florida, and three private schools in larger cities. The public schools are in smaller cities other than Baton Rouge and Knoxville.

Would Vanderbilt, Tulane, and Georgia Tech expansion into places like Arkansas and South Carolina? They would have seen Rice, SMU, and TCU as being their peers and not A&M or UT or OU.

Maybe they would have wanted UT and Rice or A&M and SMU as a pair. UNC and Duke. South Carolina and The Citadel or Furman.

(04-18-2023 05:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 04:43 PM)Porcine Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 03:45 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(04-18-2023 03:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Arkansas getting Baylor’s Big 12 spot

Frank Broyles felt that Arkansas would get left out due to Texas politics, and they'd have ended up in CUSA basically. I just don't see it, but that's what the guy that was in charge felt like.

I think when it comes down to it, the Big 8 schools would have just told Texas and A&M that there was only one additional spot. So I think Baylor is the odd man out and probably goes to the WAC-16, which leaves Tulsa out, I'd think.

So maybe Tulsa joins the original CUSA?

Frank Broyles inquired the Big 8 in the 70s and it didn't go anywhere, so it was probably a safe assumption. Once the SEC came to him for membership in 87, we were all in.

And Arkansas's patience with realignment in the SEC finally paid off handsomely. The Hogs, in part because of Broyles, was a no brainer in 1990-2's additions. South Carolina has been a decent state pick up and solidly in the middle of the SEC with a push up in various sports whether baseball, football, or hoops (mostly women's) since joining. The SEC got 2 solid additions which served, or will serve to expand connections.

I don't see any scenario in which Arkansas is not an addition, and only Clemson joining instead of South Carolina would have made their outcome different. Tulane and Georgia Tech simply would have made any Florida additions for the ACC difficult. Georgia Tech is what made FSU possible as well as Miami.

IF the SEC is sitting at 12 (Tulane and Georgia Tech) and adds South Carolina and Arkansas then the Florida schools both say yes to the SEC.

At 16 the SEC sits strong until 2012:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Tulane
Alabama, Auburn, Florida State, Mississippi State
Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Miami
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Then in 2012 perhaps we get the following:
Clemson, Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas A&M to move to 20.

Now the SEC looks like this:
Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M, Tulane
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State
Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina
Clemson, Kentucky, Miami, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Meanwhile the ACC could have grown North and with Louisville into the Northern Midwest:

Boston College, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, Missouri
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

The Big 10 still expands with Maryland, Nebraska and Rutgers around 2012. Maybe they make a run at Kansas and Missouri before the ACC can take them, maybe? They didn't when they had the chance.

The PAC 12 would have stayed at 12.

The Big 12 would have been comprised of Baylor, Houston, S.M.U., T.C.U., Texas Tech, and some MWC schools and AAC schools.

But I digressed. Arkansas would have been in the SEC anyway, and likely South Carolina as well. So nothing changes except for Florida expansion is much easier for the SEC because they are two states away from North Carolina.

In the words of a M-State youtube fan, the Bulldogs want their bacon!!