This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I'd have to think about it, but a short list for starters: G Tech, Miami and FSU
This has been discussed in FFA and it was pointed out that none of those teams give the SEC a new market. The league already dominates in the Fla and Ga. Just adding teams for the sake of being as big as the PAC-? really doesn't do much for the SEC's coffers.The title of the topic really needs to be changed. This isn't a done deal yet.
. They are not going to lie around and let them take over.as a pitt alum, i'm really concerned about where we land. i guess i have to hope like hell the big 10 extends an invite to us and wvu because the big east simply cannot survive this. as if it needed to be stated, 16-team leagues are ridiculous. why be in a conference where you cant play all of the teams?!
Are you serious?Iowa StateK StateKansasOK StateT TechOKBaylorWOW!!! That is such an academic elite!!! IVY LEAGUE, please watch out!!! what a joke of a post....If you believe this has anything to do with academics, you are living in a dream world...I think Texas would have preferred the SEC if their (the SEC's) academics were not such a concern. Can't wait to see ASU and Texas play 3 games every season in baseball. It will also be great to have the occasional regular season tilt in football with USC. Hook'em Horns! Additionally, Texas will now turn its attention a bit more west coast in terms of football recruiting. Add a few blue chips from CA to their already dominant Texas recruiting and I believe the Horns are going to be routing folks for quite a while on the gridiron. Get some!
Just to expand here....2010 academic rankings (US NEWS)...not that this matters anyway....but lets get back to REALITY:http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews....sities-rankingsI think Texas would have preferred the SEC if their (the SEC's) academics were not such a concern. Can't wait to see ASU and Texas play 3 games every season in baseball. It will also be great to have the occasional regular season tilt in football with USC. Hook'em Horns! Additionally, Texas will now turn its attention a bit more west coast in terms of football recruiting. Add a few blue chips from CA to their already dominant Texas recruiting and I believe the Horns are going to be routing folks for quite a while on the gridiron. Get some!
Sensitive much? Where did he say that the SEC's academics were bad compared to the Big XII? The following things can both be true: 1) Texas was legitimately concerned with the SEC's academics, and 2) The SEC is at least as strong as the Big XII was academically.Not saying either one IS true, but I don't understand what you're getting all snippy about.Just to expand here....2010 academic rankings (US NEWS)...not that this matters anyway....but lets get back to REALITY:http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews....sities-rankingsI think Texas would have preferred the SEC if their (the SEC's) academics were not such a concern. Can't wait to see ASU and Texas play 3 games every season in baseball. It will also be great to have the occasional regular season tilt in football with USC. Hook'em Horns! Additionally, Texas will now turn its attention a bit more west coast in terms of football recruiting. Add a few blue chips from CA to their already dominant Texas recruiting and I believe the Horns are going to be routing folks for quite a while on the gridiron. Get some!
Your beloved Longhorns would be the only Big12 school in the top 4..... (3rd BEHIND Vandy and Florida...)
rank (score)
17. Vandy (80)
47. Florida (57)
47. Texas (57)
58. Georgia (58)
61. Texas A&M (50)
77. Colorado (45)
80. Baylor (44)
88. Auburn (42)
88. Iowa St (42)
96. Alabama (41)
96. Kansas (41)
96. Nebraska (41)
102. Missouri (40)
102. Oklahoma (40)
106. Tennessee (39)
110. S Carolina (38)
128. LSU (33)
128. Arkansas (33)
128. Kentucky (33)
U/R. Kansas St
U/R. Miss St
U/R. Oklahoma St
U/R. Texas Tech
U/R. Ole Miss
Except now that the Pac-10 includes Texas and Oklahoma, the schtick will actually have the tiniest bit of truth to it.</counterschtick>The worst part of this is that we'll now never hear the end of LHUCKS' Pac-10 schtick. Ne-ver.
Florida would oppose any move to add FSU or Miami. UF loves having the SEC trump-card when it gets into in-state recruiting wars. FSU has no interesting in joining the SEC, either- they had the opportunity when they shed their independent status, but they chose the ACC because Bobby Bowden figured he had a better chance to play for national championships in a conference of creampuffs. His exact words were "I'm like George Foreman. I like to pick those unranked guys out and fight 'em. Ol' George is out there knocking out these no-names, but he'll be fighting for the heavyweight championship directly. Everybody just assumed ol' Bobby was raised in the heart of the SEC, so naturally he's going to want to jump right in. Maybe I know too much about the SEC to want to join up." Jimbo Fisher has also weighed in saying he'd much rather stay in the ACC.I think more realistic targets might be Clemson and Virginia Tech, although I don't think the SEC is going to expand for the sake of expanding. They just signed their new TV deal. More teams just means that pie has to be split more ways. Unless a team brings in substantial new revenue, they don't stand a chance.
why Rutgers? Being in the Big East hasn't stopped them yet AND they may yet end up in the Big(ger) 10.
According to all sources Notre Dame is refusing to budge on their independence, a state of mind I find incredibly short sighted. It could change if the Big Pac/PacWest/16Pac happens - it might spook them into action as between the SEC and PAC conferences, I think they might realize they could eb missing out on tons of dollars (and maybe starting to lose recruits).If this comes to pass, I applaud the Pac 10 for being first in the pool and ahead of a trend I think is coming whether we all like it or not. Big Ten getting caught with it's pants down - a month ago they were the front runners. I wonder what happened.And SSOG you make a good point (even if you're also joking a bit) - for the Pac10, the perception has been they were USC and a bunch of other schools. A lot of reasons for that but WHY isn't as important as the fact that they are often percieved that way.Add Texas and you instantly have more credibility as a football powerhouse conference, you have a natural rivalry which has some foundation already (ah Vince Young you elusive son of a gun) and perhaps the added national exposure will open the eyes of some people to some other good teams in the superconference.BTW - Texas/USC probably won't be a regular thing save for a Conference Championship game (WOO MORE MONEY MORE EXPOSURE) - you'll probably have two Divisions (if they go to the full 16) in which case they'll probably only cross over occasionally. I am a little sadthat the smaller conferences may be overlooked or swallowed whole but I think these big conferences could be really good for the game including, but not limited to, paving the way for a playoff down the road...
Except now that the Pac-10 includes Texas and Oklahoma, the schtick will actually have the tiniest bit of truth to it.</counterschtick>The worst part of this is that we'll now never hear the end of LHUCKS' Pac-10 schtick. Ne-ver.
Florida would oppose any move to add FSU or Miami. UF loves having the SEC trump-card when it gets into in-state recruiting wars. FSU has no interesting in joining the SEC, either- they had the opportunity when they shed their independent status, but they chose the ACC because Bobby Bowden figured he had a better chance to play for national championships in a conference of creampuffs. His exact words were "I'm like George Foreman. I like to pick those unranked guys out and fight 'em. Ol' George is out there knocking out these no-names, but he'll be fighting for the heavyweight championship directly. Everybody just assumed ol' Bobby was raised in the heart of the SEC, so naturally he's going to want to jump right in. Maybe I know too much about the SEC to want to join up." Jimbo Fisher has also weighed in saying he'd much rather stay in the ACC.I think more realistic targets might be Clemson and Virginia Tech, although I don't think the SEC is going to expand for the sake of expanding. They just signed their new TV deal. More teams just means that pie has to be split more ways. Unless a team brings in substantial new revenue, they don't stand a chance.
it seems to me the PAC-10 had to make some moves while the SEC is doing just fine and won't likely rush to follow the PAC-10's lead. If they did however, and it's always fun to speculate, what's keeping them from inviting UVA, UNC, Duke, Louisville, or even depending what happens with the Big Ten, ND, Rutgers or Pitt? I realize the ACC is a solid conference but so is/was the Big XII. Of all those schools I would imagine UVA adds the most aside from ND.
Totally agree with a lot of this - the SEC doesn't need to move (though they can) and this doesn't really threaten them on a larger scale or anything.This is a move the smaller conferences have to make - and given the USC sanctions allegedly hitting today this might also have been a move the Pac had to make since they'll be losing USC post season play for two years.On a side note - thanks for sticking with the sinking ship Pete Carroll.....Side Note the second - Along with ESPN and the usual suspects, there's some good SuperConference coverage over at inthebleachers.net
Meh, it's a good thing. It should be hard to win your conference and be an instant national championship contender, but it's been entirely too easy in the Pac and Big 10 for a while now. With people obsessed with undefeated teams "getting their chance", it will be nice to make teams actually work to be undefeated. It's pretty much a crime at this point for any conference not to have a conference championship game and this certainly means the Big 10 and Pac 10 will be adding one.Now we just need to do something about the Big East.
The closest thing to being officially done right now is Nebraska joining the Big 10 (they're expected to announce this officially on Friday), so I wouldn't say the Big 10 is just sitting back and waiting. They do need another team or two though, rumor was they were going to be inviting Missouri as well but it doesn't look like that's happening.
because the bowl berth rules are going to change if 2 conferences get eliminated. Also the big10 if ND doesnt join should just freeze them out, UofM, MSU, purdue there is 3 big time rivals lost. If Im the Big10 Id say join us so you dont get to play us. The Cable networks of the Big10 and coming Pac10 network is the reason, very sizeable piece of cash generated from them
The Big 10 (11) doesn't actually need another team. Adding Nebraska gets them to the 12 team threshold needed for a conference championship game in football.That said, they could go beyond 12 in the interest of creating a stronger profile for their TV network, in which case Missouri could be a candidate.
Absolutely no way UNC, Duke, or UVA leaves the ACC unless the ACC is dissolving. Someone else mentioned Virginia Tech, but I think people thinking about VT are forgetting that the Virginia governor forced UVA to vote on ACC expansion so as to require VT's inclusion. It would seem hard to justify that and then allow VT to leave just a few years later.
All good points Sniffr but it REALLY is far more simple than that.$$I've had to explain this a few times but as sweet as that ND deal is, it's just one team. If you're part of a conference, you draw cash from the whole conference - all the bowl games, all the tv, all the everything. You get a taste and sometimes the bigger the school, the bigger the percentage.I know everyone loves to point out he history of ND when talking about independance for them and the money they currently make (which is good bank) but they haven't been playing that well for some time and at some point that could catch up to them. Either when 1) the TV contract is up and the net wants to pay less and 2) the net can bid a little more for a wider variety of better games with a superconference.I mean would you rather have Notre Dame/Navy or your pick of much better matchups that fetch better ad rates?That's really the tipping point for me. Notre Dame will make more money with the Big 12, Big Ten, Pac 10 or SEC than they will solo. Long term, I think it's agood move for them.bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
Totally forgot about Nebraska - between PAC 10 expansion and USC Sanctions, head was elsewhere. My bad.Still they were way more active a mnoth ago then just kinda stopped being in the conversation of a large scale raid on ACC/Big East. Nebraska is a nice add.FreeBaGeL said:
The AZ schools are no more 'Pacific' than the TX or OK schools...
I hate to play this card, but a lot of it is media driven. We've been talking about Big 10 expansion non-stop. But honestly, as soon as the PAC 10 started talking, that's where the attention went. The Big Ten just isn't as sexy as the PAC 10. I accept that.Regardless, Nebraska is a great add. I think the for the Big 10 further expansion hinges on Notre Dame. Academically it is a very good match. Regionally it is a very good match. But in the end, is the Big 10 Network and revenue sharing model going to net them what they want?
Well, the way it seemed to me is they went pretty dark after an initial flourish several weeks ago. But your point stands and if Notre Dame jumped into the Big 10, conversation would totally go that way and forget the BigPac for a while.
I think for Notre Dame the driving force may be what will happen to their non-football sports programs in the Big East. If the Big East gets raided to where they don't have worthwhile opponents to play in other sports, that might be what tips ND's hand enough to make a move into a conference in all sports. Though I still think their preference would be to stay independent in football if they can.
Well, also, what happened to the Big East ultimatum that was allegedly handed to ND - all in or all out? I know the coaches laid it out, but maybe the regents or someone put the kibosh on it.I've NEVER understood why the Big East lets themselves get used by ND for basketball credibility. ND gets to be in a good bball conference and brings... what exactly to the table? Is anybody going to watch ND for the basketball? Or did they think Notre Dame would wake up one day and say 'Gosh those are nice fellas in the Big East, letting us play in their basketball league. Maybe we should join the football conference - that'd be a nice gesture.'?I guess some Notre Dame is better than none...
As far as I know it was just some Big East football coaches who wanted it and not something that happened. It isn't really a tactic to get ND into the Big East. It's a tactic to get ND into the Big Ten in the hopes that the Big Ten would stop with ND rather than the possibility of absorbing multiple Big East schools.Since the Big Ten took Nebraska... if they are content at stopping there then an ultimatum could backfire for the Big East, causing ND to go to the Big Ten and the Big Ten to turn to some Big East schools to round out their numbers to something better.
UNC, Duke, and Louisville would never switch to the SEC. First off, Louisville has the same problems that FSU/Miami/Ga Tech have (they don't add anything to the SEC's footprint), and they're a mediore football school at best (stadium size = 42,000, which iirc would give them the second smallest stadium in the SEC). Duke and UNC are basketball schools first, last, and always- they would never leave a basketball conference to join a football conference. UVA is a possibility, although again, they're a pretty poor football school by SEC standards. Rutgers and Pitt aren't at all feasible- they're too far removed from the other members of the SEC. If they were added, the "SEC" would have to change its name to the "EC".FUBAR said:
Big 10 and SEC schools actually make more in shared revenue than Notre Dame does, iirc. If the Pac10 becomes the Pac16, its TV deal will likely earn it more than Notre Dame's too. Also, the SEC's deal with ESPN gives them coast-to-coast exposure, too. You'll see essentially as many UF games air in California as ND games... except people will actually watch the UF games because UF is nationally relevant. All of Notre Dame's advantages might have held true 20 years ago, or even as recently as 10 years ago, but the TV deal simply isn't an advantage anymore.Black said:
I could see it happening. I think the Virginia governor was more concerned about the possibility of the Big East becoming the new CUSA and wanted to do what he could to get UVA out while the getting was good. Moving Va Tech to the SEC wouldn't present any such problems- the ACC is still a fundamentally sound league even without Va Tech (especially in basketball), so there's no need to exert some clout to get UVA out unless the SEC raid started to get really extensive (i.e. if the SEC was taking Va Tech, Clemson, Ga Tech, Miami, and FSU... then yeah, the governor would probably demand they take UVA as well, unless UVA wanted to stay in the new basketball-only ACC).Just Win Baby said:
I'm not sure exactly what you're saying here when you say "shared revenue" since ND doesn't have anyone they are sharing revenue with in football.ND was #2 last year in revenue according to Forbes, having just been passed by Texas after having been #1 for at least several years. The rest of the top 5 are Penn State, Nebraska and Alabama.
Football revenue or overall revenue? Does it say?There may be a difference....
"Shared revenue" = each individual team's split of the TV conference and bowl payouts. Basically, all the revenue that ND gets to keep to itself because it's not in a conference, but which the conference teams split amongst themselves. Notre Dame earns $9 million a year from NBC, plus gets to keep all of its bowl money to itself. If they land in a BCS bowl, they might get as much as $18-$20 million... if they land in a BCS bowl. Meanwhile, every single school in the SEC (yes, including Vanderbilt) got a check for $17.3 million last year for the shared TV revenues and bowl monies. Notre Dame would make more money from TV and Bowls if they joined a conference than they would if they remained independent.As for why Notre Dame was 2nd in total revenue... I'd imagine that would also include things like merchandising and ticket sales (which are not shared among conference teams). Notre Dame probably has a pretty substantial advantage in the merchandising department, but they would be able to keep that regardless of their affiliation.
Most likely situation is that once Texas and A&M make their move (most likely to the PAC 10 along with Oklahoma and Ok St), Big 10 will raid the Big East and take Rutgers and maybe Pitt as well as Maryland from the ACC.bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
That and also because the shine is off of the Dome nowadays. It's not the national power it used to be such that it can afford to stand alone while superconferences start to dominate the landscape, especially with those tomato cans it regularly schedules.bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
Believe nobody until the press conferences.
Now I really want to known something: What was the single first seed planted in all of this, that will go down as having incinerated the Big 12.Raiderfan32904 said:
That's probably where the SEC will go to expand.
