re: How Would a 13 Member SEC Schedule Play Out if it Came to That?

quote:

---

cajun and creole languages

---

You mean French and Spanish? Everybody should learn a second language.

no i mean cajun and creole. get a pair of glasses bro. or if you look in the top right corner there is a box where you can zoom in. try that. the zoom button. should help

I got

problems, and a

ain't one.


Comprendre dat mates?

quote:

---

Name 1 way it can be done that DOESN'T include the phrase "no divisions".

---

However the MAC has been doing it for the past couple of years while they've had 13 teams.

quote:

---

I know we've had the random expansion threads and "who would replace Ole Miss" threads in the past, but the possibility of this happening doesn't seem as far-fetched as it did previously.

---

Yes, it does. Ole Miss is not getting kicked out of the conference. If it ever got to the point of kicking schools out, Ole Miss, even with crippling probation or even the death penalty, wouldn't be our only choice, and probably wouldn't even be our first.

quote:

---

I know we've had the random expansion threads and "who would replace Ole Miss" threads in the past, but the possibility of this happening doesn't seem as far-fetched as it did previously.

---

[TL;DR version: the matter would never come to a vote, but if it did, it might be close]

As I've already posted, Ole Miss is not getting kicked out, but hypothetically, if there were a vote on it, it would be interesting to see how the votes would go. Hypothetically, I'm assuming that if they were kicked out, another school would be invited to replace them, so nobody would be motivated to vote them out just to reduce the number of mouths to feed. I'm also assuming Ole Miss would get a vote and that a simple majority is all that would be needed. That might be wrong, but we're in fantasy land already even thinking of a member being kicked out, so why not? So, how would the votes go?

Ole Miss would obviously be a "no" and Mississippi State would be a definite "yes". So, it's 1-1.

LSU, Alabama* and Auburn all recruit very heavily in Mississippi. If one in-state school were able to solidify Mississippi, with all the talent that comes out of there, that one school could be a contender and might be able to prevent the poaching that all three of these schools currently do. In addition, it would create another viable contender in the SEC West, which none of these three "big six" schools would want. I'm guessing all three of these schools would vote "no".

So that's four "no" votes and one "yes" vote.

Then we move to Texas A&M and Arkansas, the other two teams from the SEC West. Arkansas is the only one that even borders on Mississippi, and I don't even know that they recruit that much from the state, so these two would probably not be that motivated either way on the recruiting front, at least for their own direct interests. Solidifying Mississippi behind MSU might have a negative impact on LSU, Auburn and Alabama, but it might also mean that their two best chances for SEC West wins would suddenly be gone (Ole Miss) or much improved (MSU), and it would force LSU to turn even more to Texas for its out-of-state recruiting needs. Both of these schools would probably prefer to keep both Mississippi schools alive and treading water. Also, A&M might feel a little awkward being such a newcomer and voting to oust a charter member. Two more "no" votes.

So that brings us to six "no" votes and one "yes" vote among the SEC West schools.

Now, to the East. Florida doesn't play Ole Miss very often and probably doesn't compete with them or Mississippi State much in recruiting, so they would probably think along financial lines. Dropping a redundant school from a small state for one in a new state would expand the footprint and probably mean more money. The same thinking would probably prevail with Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky and Missouri. The thought of voting out a charter member might give Florida, Georgia and Kentucky pause, but they would probably vote in their own self-interests. I would count these as five "yes" votes.

So, now we're tied again at 6-6.

Vanderbilt is Ole Miss' perennial cross-divisional rival and Ole Miss is the only SEC West team they could ever hope to be competitive with, other than maybe MSU, which wouldn't be possible if Ole Miss were kicked out. Let's face it, Vanderbilt doesn't need the SEC getting any stronger, so I think Vanderbitl would vote "no".

So, that would be seven "no" votes and the motion would fail.

But if I were wrong about one of the "no" votes above and it did come down to Tennessee, what would happen? Long years ago, until the 1992 expansion, Tennessee and Ole Miss had a bit of a rivalry, but it was never that big of a deal, and 25 years, along with the demise of Ole Miss even before this fiasco, has probably drained whatever life that rivalry had out of it. I don't know how much UT recruits in Mississippi, but they are probably still interested in Memphis, which might be easier for them if Ole Miss were out of the picture. They are also one of those teams that really has to depend on recruiting outside their own state borders, so expanding the SEC footprint to a new state, especially one on the east coast, could help them. I'll guess, but obviously this could go either way, that Tennessee would vote "yes".

So, Tennessee's "yes" vote would either be meaningless in a 7-7 tie vote or would make the difference in an 8-6 vote to oust the RebBears.

* Alabama recruits nationally at the moment and would not be affected much in the short term regardless of the outcome, but traditionally they have raided Mississippi frequently and if thinking long term, would probably prefer the state not have a contender within its borders.

Miss st would only have 3 embarrassing cupcakes a year instead of 4

Sorry, but if every team in a division doesn't play the same # games, it goes back to the "who's better than whom due to non-common opponents tiebreaker headache" created with the no divisions approach.