Started By
Message
0
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:02 am to oleheat
I think there are forces beyond Slive inserting Mizzou into the discussion....
1. TexA&M might be hesitant to act on its own and face possible backlash within Texas. They may want to join the SEC, but don't want to be the first to act and be the one responsible for the fall of the Big12. Missouri can help that by being the first one to act. Not to mention it's in Missouri's best interest to be proactive rather than be the one standing when the Big12 music stops. If Mizzou isn't proactive in securing themself a solid conference, they could end up in a crap conference when all is said and done. The Big10 already rebuffed Mizzou, is they don't hop on the SEC train, they might get left in the weeds after all the dust settles.
2. Arkansas wants Mizzou AND A&M, as it gives them a couple more natural rivals and more recruiting inroads.
3. While Missouri is not as attractive as A&M, they still bring a completely new television market with them, extending the SEC's footprint.
1. TexA&M might be hesitant to act on its own and face possible backlash within Texas. They may want to join the SEC, but don't want to be the first to act and be the one responsible for the fall of the Big12. Missouri can help that by being the first one to act. Not to mention it's in Missouri's best interest to be proactive rather than be the one standing when the Big12 music stops. If Mizzou isn't proactive in securing themself a solid conference, they could end up in a crap conference when all is said and done. The Big10 already rebuffed Mizzou, is they don't hop on the SEC train, they might get left in the weeds after all the dust settles.
2. Arkansas wants Mizzou AND A&M, as it gives them a couple more natural rivals and more recruiting inroads.
3. While Missouri is not as attractive as A&M, they still bring a completely new television market with them, extending the SEC's footprint.
This post was edited on 8/1/11 at 11:03 am
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:03 am to JPLSU1981
Yall don't forget what each of these schools will bring to the table in basketball. Also, doesn't a&m have a decent baseball program?
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:03 am to wegotdatwood
quote:
Who's to say the SEC actually wants Missouri, they wouldn't bring anything to the conference.
Lot's of television sets. St. Louis and Kansas City.
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:03 am to JPLSU1981
quote:
While Missouri is not as attractive as A&M, they still bring a completely new television market with them, extending the SEC's footprint.
bingo
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:04 am to Rohan2Reed
quote:
i don't really consider Fayetteville to be the south or southeast either.
This is so dumb. Theres a confederate cemetary in downtown Fayetteville.
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:08 am to Aubie Spr96
Yea they are pretty solid in basketball
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:12 am to Aubie Spr96
While nice, the basketball ramifications of all this are merely lagniappe. Football (and more precisely football TV contracts) are the driving forces behind conference expansion.
But yes, both Mizzou and A&M have nice basketball programs as well.
But yes, both Mizzou and A&M have nice basketball programs as well.
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:14 am to JPLSU1981
quote:
lagniappe
most advanced diction i've ever seen on the Rant
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:17 am to Aubie Spr96
quote:
Also, doesn't a&m have a decent baseball program?
yeah and it's on the rise. i would LOVE to play A&M in baseball every year.
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:22 am to Buster Womb
quote:
Lot's of television sets. St. Louis and Kansas City
Do they even care about Mizzou?
As far as I'm concerned Mizzou would be a terrible pickup. They aren't southeastern and will most likely screw up either the iron bowl or 3rd Saturday. We need someone on the east coast imho.
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:24 am to JPLSU1981
quote:
Like I said above, I don't see them switching current SEC teams despite the fact that many have speculated that it could happen. I just don't think that will happen.
Is it possible that Auburn moves East? Certainly, but I think Slive will work to make additions that leave the current SEC landscape as undisturbed as possible.
They didn't the first time we expanded with Ark and USC, not sure why they would worry about changes now. Auburn lost two good rivalries with Florida and Tenn with the first expansion, I wouldn't mind going to the East and playing them again. LSU-Auburn is a good game yearly but two rivals is better than one.
The main issue I see is if Auburn moved to the East Bama would have to move to the east as well or either the Bama-Tenn or Bama-Auburn game would disappear. And if Auburn and Bama went to the east then the East division would be ridiculously unbalanced compared to the west.
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:27 am to attheua
How would this work if they were the only two added? Would Mizzou be placed in the East?
Or would there be some kind of realignment (shudder)??
Or would there be some kind of realignment (shudder)??
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:27 am to JPLSU1981
quote:
I'm with everyone else... I would love to have A&M in the SEC, but I'm definitely lukewarm at best on Mizzou.
My preference is add A&M in the West and either FlSt/NCSt/VaTech in the East and be done with expansion at 14. Opens the league up to new markets/rivalries, ups the $$$, but doesn't drastically change the current SEC landscape.
THIS X 1,000,000
My biggest fear is that an incorrect initial move by the SEC in inviting a new school(s) in is that it could restrict the SEC's expansion options. In other words, you add A&M and Mizzou you've created either a 14 team league where divisions have to be blown up (totally UNACCEPTABLE option imho)) or you have to add 2 more Eastern division teams and you basically leave zero room for OOC scheduling.
The ideal scenario is:
1) Add A&M to the SEC West
2) Add one of these schools to the SEC East...in order of best option...1) Va Tech, 2) UNC, 3) NC State
(Neither FSU or Clemson add new markets fwiw)
This post was edited on 8/1/11 at 11:29 am
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:29 am to auyushu
quote:
The main issue I see is if Auburn moved to the East Bama would have to move to the east as well or either the Bama-Tenn or Bama-Auburn game would disappear. And if Auburn and Bama went to the east then the East division would be ridiculously unbalanced compared to the west.
Unless the SEC went with two permanent opponents from the other division (like it used to). But there are many problems with doing this because teams from one division wouldn't play teams from another division for a number of years and Alabama's schedule would undoubtedly be tough to keep its rivalries in tact (like Auburn's was when its permanent opponents were Georgia and Florida).
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:34 am to auyushu
Three tigers in one division?
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:51 am to gatorprincess815
quote:
They would bring in different recruiting bases for the motherships.
Adding A&M is not going ot help SEC teams successfully recruit Texas.
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:52 am to spslayto
4 team 4 pod systems will allow 16 team conferences to work IMO
Posted on 8/1/11 at 11:53 am to attheua
quote:
They aren't southeastern and will most likely screw up either the iron bowl or 3rd Saturday.
Which is what I'm extremely afraid of with expansion. If one of those has to go, I know I'm not going to like which one it is.
Page 4 of 22
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News