Texas and Oklahoma joining the SEC

[KevFu]

I think the Big 10 dreams of getting USC, Stanford and ND. That's probably the very top of their wishlist. Maybe other huge schools that are AAU like Texas or UNC are up there too.

I think the "End game" that will play out is that the Big Ten and SEC morph over time into the "AFC/NFC" of college football, and the difference between the two will actually be, shockingly, academics. One group will actually care about them (The Big Ten) and the other will not.

So while everyone is quick to divide up the Big 12 into "Four conferences of 16" there's no real reason for that to happen.

- The Pac-12 could see the benefit of a link towards the east for earlier TV games and more exposure, and of course, Texas recruiting. But is that really worth expansion? Geography doesn't really "matter" as much as people think it does, but taking two for a Pac-14 DOES NOT work.

And finding four teams that the group will agree on, don't sacrifice the academic standards, AND don't cut the ties to California that Arizona/ASU, Colorado and Utah want to keep? Good luck.

- The ACC could try to add a Texas presence with TCU/Baylor for recruiting, but is that really worth the expansion for THEM? More likely.

Only the Big Ten would make a move to "respond" to the SEC, and that move would be North Carolina and Virginia; not Kansas or Iowa State.

While message boards are divvying up the Big 12, the value to add is in the ACC -- which is why the SEC rumor was they were talking to Clemson, Florida State, Michigan and Ohio State.

If Clemson and Florida State join the SEC, you can see the Big Ten going UNC/UVA, which makes every Big 12/ACC member calling the Big Ten/SEC and lining up a spot.

The members of AAU (UNC, UVA, Duke, Ga Tech, Pitt, Kansas) or "close to AAU" (like Notre Dame and Syracuse) would gravitate towards the Big Ten; and everyone else would gravitate toward the SEC.

 

[KevFu]

The more fascinating thing of this whole chaos is the Big 12 sending ESPN a cease and desist order, and publicly claiming ESPN was conspiring to destroy the Big 12.

And the more you look into it, the more "probably true" it seems.

 

[93LEAFS]

I think the "End game" that will play out is that the Big Ten and SEC morph over time into the "AFC/NFC" of college football, and the difference between the two will actually be, shockingly, academics. One group will actually care about them (The Big Ten) and the other will not.

So while everyone is quick to divide up the Big 12 into "Four conferences of 16" there's no real reason for that to happen.

- The Pac-12 could see the benefit of a link towards the east for earlier TV games and more exposure, and of course, Texas recruiting. But is that really worth expansion? Geography doesn't really "matter" as much as people think it does, but taking two for a Pac-14 DOES NOT work.

And finding four teams that the group will agree on, don't sacrifice the academic standards, AND don't cut the ties to California that Arizona/ASU, Colorado and Utah want to keep? Good luck.

- The ACC could try to add a Texas presence with TCU/Baylor for recruiting, but is that really worth the expansion for THEM? More likely.

Only the Big Ten would make a move to "respond" to the SEC, and that move would be North Carolina and Virginia; not Kansas or Iowa State.

While message boards are divvying up the Big 12, the value to add is in the ACC -- which is why the SEC rumor was they were talking to Clemson, Florida State, Michigan and Ohio State.

If Clemson and Florida State join the SEC, you can see the Big Ten going UNC/UVA, which makes every Big 12/ACC member calling the Big Ten/SEC and lining up a spot.

The members of AAU (UNC, UVA, Duke, Ga Tech, Pitt, Kansas) or "close to AAU" (like Notre Dame and Syracuse) would gravitate towards the Big Ten; and everyone else would gravitate toward the SEC.

Texas is AAU but they've chosen their path. I believe all 4 of the California Pac-12 teams are too. The fall out is going to be interesting.

 

[IU Hawks fan]

I think the "End game" that will play out is that the Big Ten and SEC morph over time into the "AFC/NFC" of college football, and the difference between the two will actually be, shockingly, academics. One group will actually care about them (The Big Ten) and the other will not.

So while everyone is quick to divide up the Big 12 into "Four conferences of 16" there's no real reason for that to happen.

- The Pac-12 could see the benefit of a link towards the east for earlier TV games and more exposure, and of course, Texas recruiting. But is that really worth expansion? Geography doesn't really "matter" as much as people think it does, but taking two for a Pac-14 DOES NOT work.

And finding four teams that the group will agree on, don't sacrifice the academic standards, AND don't cut the ties to California that Arizona/ASU, Colorado and Utah want to keep? Good luck.

- The ACC could try to add a Texas presence with TCU/Baylor for recruiting, but is that really worth the expansion for THEM? More likely.

Only the Big Ten would make a move to "respond" to the SEC, and that move would be North Carolina and Virginia; not Kansas or Iowa State.

While message boards are divvying up the Big 12, the value to add is in the ACC -- which is why the SEC rumor was they were talking to Clemson, Florida State, Michigan and Ohio State.

If Clemson and Florida State join the SEC, you can see the Big Ten going UNC/UVA, which makes every Big 12/ACC member calling the Big Ten/SEC and lining up a spot.

The members of AAU (UNC, UVA, Duke, Ga Tech, Pitt, Kansas) or "close to AAU" (like Notre Dame and Syracuse) would gravitate towards the Big Ten; and everyone else would gravitate toward the SEC.

I see something similar, 2 mega-conferences.

I don't know how important academics play into it as existing ties will play into them, but it's pretty much going to be an ESPN conference (SEC/ACC) and a FOX conference (Big Ten/PAC12).

My dream has always been to scrap the whole thing and form a 'Super League' of 60-80 schools, grouped into several conferences. Play 10 games in conference and 2 out of the conference against teams within the super league system, that would be randomly selected during a massive annual TV event.

 

[KevFu]

We can all come up with a better system if we were "Alignment Czar," but all things that would make college football better and back towards awesome; and all the problems with "Super Conferences" or making a big breakaway league of 64 or 80 schools in 8 or 10 groups of 8, or six groups of 12, or whatever; with even divisions for geography/strength/rivalries..

They're not going to sit down and do that because they don't view themselves as equals. They don't. And likely never will.

Texas joining the SEC is actually a massive shift in UT philosophy. Their stance was always that "The Best Conference is the conference with Texas in it," and they looked down at the SEC for it's inferior academics. UT would rather be in the Big Ten than SEC, if all things were equal. But they're NOT equal.

 

[tank44]

If we morph into Mega-Conferences, what does SEC do with Kentucky, Vanderbilt & Mississppi schools. They dont really belong in a NCAA football mega league.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

If we morph into Mega-Conferences, what does SEC do with Kentucky, Vanderbilt & Mississppi schools. They dont really belong in a NCAA football mega league.

Kentucky is safe, they're the flagship school for the conference in basketball

 

[generalshepherd141]

If we morph into Mega-Conferences, what does SEC do with Kentucky, Vanderbilt & Mississppi schools. They dont really belong in a NCAA football mega league.

Kentucky and Vandy are completely safe, for differing reasons. Kentucky is a basketball power and that holds weight. As for Vandy, they're the best academic school in the conference. Even though neither basketball nor academics are the conference's priorities, these reasons will keep them around for sure.

I don't see the SEC kicking members out, but if it were to happen then my guess is the Mississippi schools would be the ones to go. I guess theoretically it's possible if the conference wants a couple of other schools really badly. Dividing conference revenue by 16 is more attractive than dividing it by 18. Plus, the Mississippi schools don't add much to the conference revenue-wise and they are nothing special academically.

But I can't imagine the rest of the SEC turning on these two so abruptly. It would really kill the SEC's image too.

 

[HisIceness]

If we morph into Mega-Conferences, what does SEC do with Kentucky, Vanderbilt & Mississppi schools. They dont really belong in a NCAA football mega league.

Nothing in all likihood. Vanderbilt is the only private institution in the conference and it's also the only one located in a large-ish market. Kentucky has their basketball program to keep them afloat. The Mississippi schools are pretty much founding members of the conference are they not? I don't think you can kick them out without red tape and threats of lawsuits or huge buyouts getting involved.

If the conference were to kick members out, dare I say Arkansas? They joined in what, 1992 along with South Carolina? Geographically they are kind of an outsider, they're closer to the Oklahoma schools than they are to LSU, Ole Miss, etc. But then where do they go? You have to assume that red tape and threats of lawsuits are in store too.

 

[PCSPounder]

Please excuse the following tangent for a moment.

Olympics TV Ratings Down a Lot, But in Line With Broadcast Declines – The Hollywood Reporter

The gist- Olympic ratings are down 42% from five years ago. Thing being, ratings for an average television program are down 39%.

Viva la cord-cutting. I think that's the first time I've read the effect expressed in these terms.

This means eyeball #s are more important than market size for college sports. This is why Arkansas ain't going nowhere. This is why the Pac-12 schools rumored to be considering the B1G are usually USC, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, sometimes UCLA and Arizona, and never Stanford... or Cal. Certainly not Oregon State, Washington State, or Utah.

But that's probably also why you won't see too much more movement. Apparently the big 12 and Pac-12 commissioners met today about a scheduling alliance and other options. Arguably, the Pac-12 can't really gain any traction with a TV contract by actually adding big 12 schools. Yet most of the big 12 schools would be in the upper half of earnings by each school in a merged Pac or whatever. Not that the Texas/Oklahoma move isn't seismic and someone given to big thinking might pull something off, but the smart money is on really not much secondary realignment activity.

 

[golfortennis]

I think the "End game" that will play out is that the Big Ten and SEC morph over time into the "AFC/NFC" of college football, and the difference between the two will actually be, shockingly, academics. One group will actually care about them (The Big Ten) and the other will not.

So while everyone is quick to divide up the Big 12 into "Four conferences of 16" there's no real reason for that to happen.

- The Pac-12 could see the benefit of a link towards the east for earlier TV games and more exposure, and of course, Texas recruiting. But is that really worth expansion? Geography doesn't really "matter" as much as people think it does, but taking two for a Pac-14 DOES NOT work.

And finding four teams that the group will agree on, don't sacrifice the academic standards, AND don't cut the ties to California that Arizona/ASU, Colorado and Utah want to keep? Good luck.

- The ACC could try to add a Texas presence with TCU/Baylor for recruiting, but is that really worth the expansion for THEM? More likely.

Only the Big Ten would make a move to "respond" to the SEC, and that move would be North Carolina and Virginia; not Kansas or Iowa State.

While message boards are divvying up the Big 12, the value to add is in the ACC -- which is why the SEC rumor was they were talking to Clemson, Florida State, Michigan and Ohio State.

If Clemson and Florida State join the SEC, you can see the Big Ten going UNC/UVA, which makes every Big 12/ACC member calling the Big Ten/SEC and lining up a spot.

The members of AAU (UNC, UVA, Duke, Ga Tech, Pitt, Kansas) or "close to AAU" (like Notre Dame and Syracuse) would gravitate towards the Big Ten; and everyone else would gravitate toward the SEC.

Does the BT look at UNC after the recent scandal over the academics? Since it stretched beyond the athletic department, and given the BT's focus there, I would almost think UNC is "sullied." Had it simply been an athletics thing, that would be one thing, but UNC had their academic reputation damaged through that.

Or are there more important rea$on$?

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Does the BT look at UNC after the recent scandal over the academics? Since it stretched beyond the athletic department, and given the BT's focus there, I would almost think UNC is "sullied." Had it simply been an athletics thing, that would be one thing, but UNC had their academic reputation damaged through that.

Or are there more important rea$on$?

I feel like the ACC could also look to merge with the AAC to survive if FSU and Clemson leave.

That would net them UCF, USF, Houston, SMU, ECU and Cincy in football and Temple, Cincy, Memphis in basketball.

While a step below the mega SEC and B1G, it would be a damn good 2 sport conference still

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

Say the SEC goes for 18

Oklahoma State would be #9 in the West. Maybe Cincinnati for the East, since it is basically across the Ohio River from the state of Kentucky. It would also give both divisions a Midwestern school (with Missouri moving to the West).

 

[mouser]

Say the SEC goes for 18

Oklahoma State would be #9 in the West. Maybe Cincinnati for the East, since it is basically across the Ohio River from the state of Kentucky. It would also give both divisions a Midwestern school (with Missouri moving to the West).

The SEC added whales in Texas and Oklahoma to move from 14 to 16 schools.

If the SEC wants to grow from 16 to 18 or more they’re not going to target the smaller fish like Oklahoma State and the minnow Cincinnati. They’re going to go after the whales in the ACC.

 

[PCSPounder]

Say the SEC goes for 18

Oklahoma State would be #9 in the West. Maybe Cincinnati for the East, since it is basically across the Ohio River from the state of Kentucky. It would also give both divisions a Midwestern school (with Missouri moving to the West).

To expand on mouser’s point…

The goal isn’t merely to expand the pie. The goal is to grow the SLICES of the pie. Neither Oklahoma State nor Cincinnati grow the slices.

 

[IU Hawks fan]

Cincinnati, LOL.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

The SEC added whales in Texas and Oklahoma to move from 14 to 16 schools.

If the SEC wants to grow from 16 to 18 or more they’re not going to target the smaller fish like Oklahoma State and the minnow Cincinnati. They’re going to go after the whales in the ACC.

Yeah, if the SEC goes to 18 I dont see how its anyone but Clemson and FSU

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Those are obviously the heavy hitters, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the SEC was okay with the likes of Virginia Tech and either North Carolina or North Carolina State as options to get to 18.

 

[hockeykicker]

I think the SEC needs the triple option of Navy lol

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Those are obviously the heavy hitters, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the SEC was okay with the likes of Virginia Tech and either North Carolina or North Carolina State as options to get to 18.

True.

I'm looking at it as both Clemson and FSU will be willing dance partners with the SEC. The last thing either program wants is to get left out in the cold and wither away in a 2nd tier conference

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

Cincinnati, LOL.

The SEC certainly can't have Ohio State

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Ohio State not being a realistic option doesn’t mean that the SEC is desperate enough to make a massive reach for an admittedly good mid-major. They want the flagships and/or major markets. Going after Cincinnati for a piece of the Ohio pie would be almost as crazy as adding a school like Rutgers in an attempt to get the NYC market.

Not that I’m still annoyed at that brilliant Big Ten move, nosirree.

 

[KevFu]

Those are obviously the heavy hitters, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the SEC was okay with the likes of Virginia Tech and either North Carolina or North Carolina State as options to get to 18.

Well, the rumor was that they reached out to 1 and 2 in the Big 12.... and ACC.... and Big Ten. Texas, Oklahoma, Clemson, Florida State and Ohio State, Michigan.

If they wanted to go to 20, while harming those three (a) they aren't getting Ohio State/Michigan, but (b) that could force the Big Ten into a response; and when that happens, you'd probably see "Phase One" of what I said above:

1. SEC takes Clemson, Florida State
2. Big Ten takes Virginia, North Carolina
3. SEC takes Virginia Tech and NC State

 

[cutchemist42]

The more fascinating thing of this whole chaos is the Big 12 sending ESPN a cease and desist order, and publicly claiming ESPN was conspiring to destroy the Big 12.

And the more you look into it, the more "probably true" it seems.

I mean people still think they had a big hand in killing the BE.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Of the ACC, my hunch is that the Big Ten would be most interested in trying to poach Syracuse, Virginia, North Carolina, and/or Georgia Tech. If any of those are realistic remains to be seen, though. And if you swapped Mizzou with Rutgers, that'd borderline be my ideal Big Ten superconference, but no chance anyone would want to leave the SEC obviously.

I don't really think that they're all too interested in Kansas or any of the other Big 12 teams, tbqh.