Started By
Message
1
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:50 pm to McRebel42
quote:
well hell move mizzou back to the west add UNC/UVA to the east and let's go with two 8 team divisions
Two 8 team divisions and a 9 game SEC schedule. Done deal and keeps it simple.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:51 pm to bama1959
quote:
That's what happens when you vote in a liberal.
What does that even mean, liberals are the only ones who think consumers ought to have their demands met in the market place?
Non-liberals should just take what's offered and shut up and sit down?
Are you fa'real?
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:53 pm to tider04
quote:
I could live with this, but I still think it will cause problems. You will have 2 pod champs each year that don't get to play in the SECCG, which will cause issues for sure. I just think two divisions is a better format. If that's not realistic, just kill the divisions like we did in basketball and take the two best SEC teams based on SEC record and BCS rankings in that order.
there simply would be no such thing as a pod champion though. You'd play everyone in your pod and your paired pod. It's a pseudo-8 team division. Winning your "pod" doesn't mean shite. Hell, you could win your pod and finish 5th in division.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 1:53 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Oklahoma and Va Tech 
Posted on 11/19/12 at 2:00 pm to aggressor
quote:
As to the "customers" comment you have to understand that if you live in and SEC state you are already accounted for in the eyes of the league. "Expansion" by definition is enlarging that base of customers. What it comes down to in the end is if you live in South Carolina for instance you will end up paying $1-2 per month for the SEC Network as a part of your package. If you live in NC or VA right now you will pay $.05-.10. Add UNC and UVA though and you just added 10 million or so TV sets that you get to charge that $1-2 per month.
so how can you say adding FSU or Miami doesn't add TV viewers. You telling me they are counting poeple in and around Tallahassee and Miami as SEC viewers already and they won't add any tv sets? Miami is like 8 hours away from UF.
I understand what your saying about adding a state, but you can argue a better product means more viewers outside of your viewing area. I think that was proven when Bama and LSU played, had over 11 million viewers from the Nielsen ratings.
Wouldn't you want more actual viewers watching your network? Woudln't you want a better product?
Who wants to watch North Carolina, Virginia, Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Mizzou and play football? Basketball, Yea. Chess, Maybe. Football, NO. Just b/c they are in the SEC doesn't mean people will watch it. These aren't "football" schools and don't interest the casual fan.
Wouldn't you rather watch LSU, Bama, Georgia, Florida, FSU, Miami, A&M, and when they get better Tennessee, Auburn and RKansas playing each other every year? These are football schools. Outsiders don't mind watching them when they are ranked highly and playing each other.
I'm tired of the academic shite people keep bringing up. This is a football conference, and all of the SEC with the exception of Vanderbilt and Kentucky pretty much revolves around football year round. Who gives a shite if UVA is a good academic school. How does that make the conference more money when it comes to playing a football game and drawing viewers, which is evidently all the SEC cares about from what you're saying?
Wouldn't the SEC be able to negotiate higher premiums for their network if the product was great, having top 10 matchups every week, as opposed to "oh hey, look UNC's playing UVA this week and they are in the SEC so we'll charge a premium for this game b/c they are in the SEC"
Posted on 11/19/12 at 2:03 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
quote:
Which two should we grab?
I know it doesn't make sense from the TV standpoint, but I want FSU and Clemson.
Which leads me to believe that this is a thread about who we would like to see in the SEC.
I'm sorry if I think that adding Mizzou was a mistake. I guess you think it was great because of the money, but I'm just a fan whose primary concenr is entertainment, and I don't find Mizzou in the SEC entertaining at all.
But then I guess as simple consumers, we shouldn't actually be concerned with our entertainment and should just focus on the revenue stream for the SEC front office.
So carry on with your prediciting who the SEC will get next, something tells me you don't really know what you're talking about as you would have NEVER predicted Mizzou to the SEC.
Damn dude, you mad! As I said, wish for who you want but it won't make it happen unless it fits those guidelines. I also wanted A&M in the SEC back when I was in school and going back to the Jackie days. Always felt we fit better. Politics weren't right back then and what conferences looked for in expansion was different as well as no one dreamed of a conference network.
BTW, I predicted Mizzou to go with A&M back in '10 on the first go 'round with expansion but I was a Texager and not a Ranter back then. Just follow the money and it was pretty easy to see. I had some fear that the SEC might panic and take WVU but always figured the academics would nix that. VTech was the other likely possibility but the politics aren't going to work for them unless the ACC blows up. The key is adding to the footprint and adding academics and Mizzou does that.
BTW, Mike Slive is a UVA grad and the proposed new offices for the SEC Network are in North Carolina.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 2:20 pm to McRebel42
quote:
COSTAL SEC
Florida
North Carolina
South Carolina
Georgia
ALMOST YANKEES SEC
Tennessee
Kentucky
Vanderbilt
Virginia
DEEP SOUTH SEC
Alabama
Auburn
Ole Miss
Mississippi State
WESTERN SKY SEC
Missouri
Arkansas
Texas A&M
LSU
Love the pod idea, but not these pods. Not enough balance. Yes things run in cycles but the Coastal is way too tough and almost yankees too weak. I also think the Western pod would need tweaking.
This post was edited on 11/19/12 at 2:21 pm
Posted on 11/19/12 at 2:23 pm to baytiger
how weak will bamas schedule be then
Posted on 11/19/12 at 2:26 pm to aggressor
quote:
Damn dude, you mad!
I do get pissed when people try to tell me how to think. Sorry I'm not a sheep.
Maybe I was wrong, but the OP seemed to indicate that this was a thread about who we would like to see join the SEC, not just trying to predict who the front office would take. More of a 'who would you like to see' type question as opposed to a 'who do you think is most likely'. Everytime this subject comes up, and it has come up a LOT in the last few years, some know-it-all idiot points out the obvious and says, "You people are stupid dreamers, it's all about money. It'll be Fresno State and Pitt because those teams make the best economic sense. It's all about footprint."
But what makes me mad is when the sheep just nod their heads and say, "Yes, Fresno State and Pitt..." not caring anymore about who they actually want to see their team play regularly.
If people actually started to make their desires for product clear, the money men would find a way to make it happen. Otherwise we just accept what they tell us to.
PS I failed to point it out earlier, but your prediction of getting UNC is off base. By my criteria, yes, they look good, but by your criteria it ain't gonna happen because they aren't going anywhere without Duke. You don't seem to understand about Tobacco Road.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 2:32 pm to Spaceball 1
quote:
Va Tech
Yes.
quote:
Oklahoma
No.
Yes they would be a great addition to a conference.
But A&M had trouble competing against OU and t.u. for recruits in the Big 12 as they were considered (at best) the third option in the conference.
Now A&M has differentiated itself from OU and t.u. by being the ONLY SEC program in Texas, and with its success can now seriously compete with these two for top recruits.
Why let OU back in the picture, given their long history of top-level success? Keep them out, help your own program.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 2:34 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
If people actually started to make their desires for product clear, the money men would find a way to make it happen. Otherwise we just accept what they tell us to.
I appreciate what you're saying, but when it comes big money the schools are going to do what THEY think is best. Not what the fans may want. I just read somewhere this morning that in polls conducted over the weekend Big 10 fans were overwhelmingly against adding Maryland and Maryland fans were overwhelmingly against joining the Big 10...... But it's still going to happen.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 2:41 pm to baytiger
NC State V Tech
Posted on 11/19/12 at 2:55 pm to baytiger
14 teams is a logistical nightmare as many have pointed out - but 16 teams with four divisions is only a major improvement if you are allowed to have a two rounds of playoffs for your conference.
Assuming the most likely schools under consideration are Va Tech, NC State, and OU you could come up with something logical to mostly evenly distribute the worst teams (into four different divisions) and the better programs (into four different divisions)
Option One: Addition of NC State and Va Tech. Four team divisions with one permanent out of division opponent and four rotating opponents from other divisions
SEC NW:
Alabama (Tenn)
Auburn (UGA)
Missouri (Arkansas)
MSU (Ole Miss)
SEC SW:
LSU (UF)
Texas A&M (Va Tech)
Arkansas (Missouri)
Ole Miss (MSU)
SEC SE:
Florida (LSU)
Georgia (Auburn)
South Carolina (NC State)
Kentucky (Vanderbilt)
SEC NE:
Tennessee (Bama)
Va Tech (Texas A&M)
NC State (USC)
Vanderbilt (Kentucky)
Option One with two fixed out of division opponents: - five fixed opponents with three rotating out of division opponents
SEC NW:
Alabama (Tenn, LSU)
Auburn (UGA, UF)
Missouri (Arkansas, Texas A&M)
MSU (Ole Miss, Kentucky)
SEC SW:
LSU (Bama, UF)
Texas A&M (Va Tech, Missouri)
Arkansas (Missouri, NC State)
Ole Miss (MSU, Vanderbilt)
SEC NE:
Tennessee (Bama, Georgia)
Va Tech (Texas A&M, USC)
NC State (USC, Arkansas)
Vanderbilt (Kentucky, Ole Miss)
SEC SE:
Florida (LSU, Auburn)
Georgia (Auburn, Tennessee)
South Carolina (NC State, Va Tech)
Kentucky (Vanderbilt, MSU)
Option Two: Addition of OU and NC State.
This one plays hell with everything because OU allows Bama/Auburn to move East but the Bama/Auburn, Bama/UT, Auburn/UGA, UT/UGA, UT/Vandy, UT/UF, LSU/Bama, LSU/Auburn, LSU/UF etc games are pretty near impossible to all preserve on an annual basis
SEC West:
Oklahoma (UF)
Texas A&M (LSU)
Missouri (Arky)
MSU (Ole Miss)
SEC West Central:
LSU (A&M)
Tennessee (Bama)
Arkansas (Missouri)
Ole Miss (MSU)
SEC East:
Alabama (Tennessee)
Auburn (UGA)
NC State (USC)
Kentucky (Vandy)
SEC SE:
Florida (A&M)
Georgia (Auburn)
USC (NC State)
Vanderbilt (Kentucky)
Option Two - with two fixed out of division opponents:
If those are the teams that were added you might do better to consider having more fixed out of division opponents to maintain more (still not all) of these rivalry games:
SEC West:
Oklahoma (UF, Bama)
Texas A&M (LSU, Auburn)
Missouri (Arky, Ole Miss)
MSU (Ole Miss, Kentucky)
SEC West Central:
LSU (A&M, UF)
Tennessee (Bama, Georgia)
Arkansas (Missouri, USC)
Ole Miss (MSU, Missouri)
SEC East:
Alabama (Tennessee, OU)
Auburn (UGA, Texas A&M)
NC State (USC, Vanderbilt)
Kentucky (Vandy, MSU)
SEC SE:
Florida (OU, LSU)
Georgia (Auburn, Tennessee)
USC (NC State, Arkansas)
Vanderbilt (Kentucky, NC State)
With an 8 game schedule that would be five fixed opponents and three rotating opponents. There will be a lot of people who will want to go to a 9 game schedule instead but that might be a bad idea because if you are adding two more SEC games for several teams you will increase the loss total for more of your premiere teams and lower their value in BCS bowls etc.
Assuming the most likely schools under consideration are Va Tech, NC State, and OU you could come up with something logical to mostly evenly distribute the worst teams (into four different divisions) and the better programs (into four different divisions)
Option One: Addition of NC State and Va Tech. Four team divisions with one permanent out of division opponent and four rotating opponents from other divisions
SEC NW:
Alabama (Tenn)
Auburn (UGA)
Missouri (Arkansas)
MSU (Ole Miss)
SEC SW:
LSU (UF)
Texas A&M (Va Tech)
Arkansas (Missouri)
Ole Miss (MSU)
SEC SE:
Florida (LSU)
Georgia (Auburn)
South Carolina (NC State)
Kentucky (Vanderbilt)
SEC NE:
Tennessee (Bama)
Va Tech (Texas A&M)
NC State (USC)
Vanderbilt (Kentucky)
Option One with two fixed out of division opponents: - five fixed opponents with three rotating out of division opponents
SEC NW:
Alabama (Tenn, LSU)
Auburn (UGA, UF)
Missouri (Arkansas, Texas A&M)
MSU (Ole Miss, Kentucky)
SEC SW:
LSU (Bama, UF)
Texas A&M (Va Tech, Missouri)
Arkansas (Missouri, NC State)
Ole Miss (MSU, Vanderbilt)
SEC NE:
Tennessee (Bama, Georgia)
Va Tech (Texas A&M, USC)
NC State (USC, Arkansas)
Vanderbilt (Kentucky, Ole Miss)
SEC SE:
Florida (LSU, Auburn)
Georgia (Auburn, Tennessee)
South Carolina (NC State, Va Tech)
Kentucky (Vanderbilt, MSU)
Option Two: Addition of OU and NC State.
This one plays hell with everything because OU allows Bama/Auburn to move East but the Bama/Auburn, Bama/UT, Auburn/UGA, UT/UGA, UT/Vandy, UT/UF, LSU/Bama, LSU/Auburn, LSU/UF etc games are pretty near impossible to all preserve on an annual basis
SEC West:
Oklahoma (UF)
Texas A&M (LSU)
Missouri (Arky)
MSU (Ole Miss)
SEC West Central:
LSU (A&M)
Tennessee (Bama)
Arkansas (Missouri)
Ole Miss (MSU)
SEC East:
Alabama (Tennessee)
Auburn (UGA)
NC State (USC)
Kentucky (Vandy)
SEC SE:
Florida (A&M)
Georgia (Auburn)
USC (NC State)
Vanderbilt (Kentucky)
Option Two - with two fixed out of division opponents:
If those are the teams that were added you might do better to consider having more fixed out of division opponents to maintain more (still not all) of these rivalry games:
SEC West:
Oklahoma (UF, Bama)
Texas A&M (LSU, Auburn)
Missouri (Arky, Ole Miss)
MSU (Ole Miss, Kentucky)
SEC West Central:
LSU (A&M, UF)
Tennessee (Bama, Georgia)
Arkansas (Missouri, USC)
Ole Miss (MSU, Missouri)
SEC East:
Alabama (Tennessee, OU)
Auburn (UGA, Texas A&M)
NC State (USC, Vanderbilt)
Kentucky (Vandy, MSU)
SEC SE:
Florida (OU, LSU)
Georgia (Auburn, Tennessee)
USC (NC State, Arkansas)
Vanderbilt (Kentucky, NC State)
With an 8 game schedule that would be five fixed opponents and three rotating opponents. There will be a lot of people who will want to go to a 9 game schedule instead but that might be a bad idea because if you are adding two more SEC games for several teams you will increase the loss total for more of your premiere teams and lower their value in BCS bowls etc.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 2:56 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
I do get pissed when people try to tell me how to think. Sorry I'm not a sheep.
Nobody is telling you how to think. You're free to think and say what you like. That doesn't mean that you are correct about much when it comes to this subject or that your worldview is accurate. The two things are not mutually exclusive. You can speak and be wrong.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 2:59 pm to noladan
quote:
But it's still going to happen.
If no one went to the games or watched on TV, it wouldn't happen.
But what the hell, we're sheep. We're going to open our beers, turn on the TV and tune into whatever circus they want to show us.
I find myself becoming less of a fan. I already gave up my season tickets because I was tired of spending all of that money to watch 4 OOC cupcakes and maybe one good conference game.
To be good consumers we should be more discriminating. But overall we're lazy and deserve what we get.
Okay frick it, let's add Fresno State and Pitt.
#footprint
Posted on 11/19/12 at 3:03 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
With WatchESPN rolling out, tv networks could be going a la carte in a few years.
If by a few you mean 30.
Cable is entrenched.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 3:13 pm to Spaceball 1
F no.
I don't want OU to EVER come. This is A&M's chance to tear down their empire, I don't want to validate their status by letting them in the SEC.
I don't want OU to EVER come. This is A&M's chance to tear down their empire, I don't want to validate their status by letting them in the SEC.
Posted on 11/19/12 at 3:14 pm to baytiger
FSU & Oklahoma. Find a way to help FSU with their $50m escape clause. Can even do 4 pods like below:
East-(UF, FSU, Bama, Auburn),(UK, UT, UGA, USC)
West-(LSU, Ole Miss, MSU, aTm), (Mizzu, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Vandy)
East-(UF, FSU, Bama, Auburn),(UK, UT, UGA, USC)
West-(LSU, Ole Miss, MSU, aTm), (Mizzu, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Vandy)
Posted on 11/19/12 at 3:26 pm to molsusports
quote:No need to read beyond that point as the rest of your post is based upon a set of facts that isn't going to happen. The NCAA isn't changing the conference championship rule, especially if the SEC is the only conference requesting it. If you want to play a conference championship game, you must have two divisions that play a round robin within their divisions. Absent that, you don't get to have a conference championship game.
14 teams is a logistical nightmare as many have pointed out - but 16 teams with four divisions is only a major improvement if you are allowed to have a two rounds of playoffs for your conference.
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News