Started By
Message
re: Any new grumblings on conference expansion ?
Posted on 3/9/14 at 9:43 pm to Cheese Grits
Posted on 3/9/14 at 9:43 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
Since Utah was the other PAC add, not like it affected the Big 12 or Big 10. So at that point you have a stable PAC 12, a stable B1G 12, a stable Big 12, a stable SEC, and a stable ACC. Nebraska was the only brand name that moved in realignment and the only other brand coveted by the B1G - who started realignment in the 90's and in 2009 - was Notre Dame so what pushes any conference to go past 12? Look at the Big 12 before Nebraska left 12 schools, #2 football (3 solid brand names in football - Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska), Kansas in basketball, and 7 AAU schools. It is not like Colorado was a brand name in football or basketball and even with both gone you still had 5 AAU schools. Adding Louisville and West Virginia did no academic favors, but at least UL brought value in basketball and WVU brought value in football. With those two keeping it at 12, you do not have to add TCU and adding solid schools in the North probably keeps Mizzou in the fold after they got left at the altar by the B1G. Mizzou could form a voting block of non TX and OK schools (MU, UL, WVU, KSU, FU, ISU) = 6 votes and that is enough to stall the folks in austin a norman from have monopoly power.
This is all fine and dandy but as long as one school was calling the shots we were going to do everything we could to leave. The voting block might seem like a possibility but I don't think that's how things really worked. This was the Big 12, not the SEC. Even so, Texas could always hold the possibility of leaving and taking other schools with them over the ISUs and KSUs.
It was mutually beneficial financially for the SEC to take us and for us to leave, it reopened the negotiating rights for TV and strengthened the footprint for an SEC Network. We stood to make much more money. So did Mizzou. So did the SEC. Adding Louisville would have made the Big 12 better but it wouldn't have stopped us from leaving nor Mizzou
This post was edited on 3/9/14 at 9:45 pm
Posted on 3/9/14 at 9:46 pm to ShaneTheLegLechler
quote:
Adding Louisville would have made the Big 12 better but it wouldn't have stopped us from leaving nor Mizzou
I'm still amazed the B1G didn't take Mizzou. It seemed like a natural fit. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they are here. And maybe it does make more sense for Mizzou to be in the SEC, given how much they recruit Texas.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 9:48 pm to ShaneTheLegLechler
I don't know what the B12 is going to do. It just doesn't seem sustainable over the long haul but I'm not sure what the options are.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 9:51 pm to Ton Chou
I f'ing hope not.
All expansion did was water down the brand and create scheduling headaches.
Further expansion will make it worse.
All expansion did was water down the brand and create scheduling headaches.
Further expansion will make it worse.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 9:51 pm to ShaneTheLegLechler
quote:
Adding Louisville would have made the Big 12 better but it wouldn't have stopped us from leaving nor Mizzou
TAMU = yes
MU = ??
Just like Nebraska had been dancing with the B1G for a century, so Texas A&M had been dancing with the SEC. TAMU was in the SIAA with all the other SEC schools 100 years ago and had plenty of history with SEC schools (including Arkansas) so like the Huskers, the SEC was just a delayed move leftover from the 1990's. Mizzou was not that integrated and had Oklahoma come with Texas A&M, Mizzou might be in the AAC with Cincinnati right now.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 9:52 pm to TigersOfGeauxld
quote:
I'm still amazed the B1G didn't take Mizzou
They should have taken the initiative to go to 14 and tried to take Nebraska, Kansas and Mizzou all in one swoop. Maybe they didn't want to gut the Big 12 like that but that would have been a huge coup. Now they are stuck with Maryland and Rutgers which are subpar additions IMO. They are located near big markets but have very little appeal outside Maryland basketball which has been in the dumps lately
Posted on 3/9/14 at 9:53 pm to ShaneTheLegLechler
And according to this
they were 5th in TV ratings per conference. The SEC had 9 of the top 15 most viewed football teams.
they were 5th in TV ratings per conference. The SEC had 9 of the top 15 most viewed football teams.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 9:55 pm to Cheese Grits
quote:
Just like Nebraska had been dancing with the B1G for a century, so Texas A&M had been dancing with the SEC. TAMU was in the SIAA with all the other SEC schools 100 years ago and had plenty of history with SEC schools (including Arkansas) so like the Huskers, the SEC was just a delayed move leftover from the 1990's. Mizzou was not that integrated and had Oklahoma come with Texas A&M, Mizzou might be in the AAC with Cincinnati right now.
Yeah I agree with you here. We weren't tied to Mizzou. My point was that we would have kept trying until we found another school to get to 14 and it was advantageous for all parties. Mizzou made the most sense though with the TV markets they brought to the table and that they were disgruntled.
Adding Louisville wouldn't have appeased us and thus would have kept the Big 12 in a state of flux because still would have been looking for a way out
Posted on 3/9/14 at 10:33 pm to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
quote:
I don't know what the B12 is going to do. It just doesn't seem sustainable over the long haul but I'm not sure what the options are.
I think the new "Champions" Sugar Bowl agreement and the Big 12/SEC Challenge is the Big 12's way of making sure it will be one of the big four conferences if the 16+ team super-conferences would have ever come true. Obviously the B1G and Pac 12 have long been "hitched" together, and now the Big 12 and SEC are.
I know the ACC has a new GOR that makes it hard to leave, but I believe 8 votes would dissolve the conference and free them from it. Two teams to both the SEC and B1G plus 4-6 teams to the Big 12 would take care of that.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 10:39 pm to BamaDude06
quote:
but I believe 8 votes would dissolve the conference and free them from it.
That's a lot of votes man. I just don't see it happening.
quote:
and the Big 12/SEC Challenge
I wish we would do that in football. We already have tie-ins. Rotate the rest and move them to opening day. That would be pretty cool.
Posted on 3/9/14 at 11:32 pm to TigersOfGeauxld
Mizzou was offered the same JR membership deal that Nebraska got from the Big 10. We declined, attempted to negotiate a better deal so they offered Neb the same thing and they jumped.
Worked out OK for us though ;)
Worked out OK for us though ;)
Posted on 3/9/14 at 11:36 pm to Cheese Grits
The AAC? Lol! WTF are you talking about? That NEVER would have happened.
We would be in the Big 10 starting next year if we didn't jump to the SEC.
We would be in the Big 10 starting next year if we didn't jump to the SEC.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 12:10 am to Cheese Grits
quote:
Mizzou could form a voting block of non TX and OK schools (MU, UL, WVU, KSU, FU, ISU) = 6 votes and that is enough to stall the folks in austin a norman from have monopoly power.
which is exactly why Texas did not want to go back to 12 schools and why they wanted TCU instead of somebody else from a different state.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 5:29 am to Garfield
quote:
Kick bama out and add Tulane
Bama is clearly a B1G school in philosophy. Slow, plodding, behind the times.
It's time to go.
Posted on 3/10/14 at 6:11 am to Mizz-SEC
quote:
Bama is clearly a B1G school in philosophy. Slow, plodding, behind the times.
It's time to go.
quote:
Missouri Fan
Posted on 3/10/14 at 8:43 am to TigersOfGeauxld
quote:
I'm still amazed the B1G didn't take Mizzou. It seemed like a natural fit. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they are here. And maybe it does make more sense for Mizzou to be in the SEC, given how much they recruit Texas.
You aren't the only one. As tOSU prez said, they should have went hard after Mizzou.
There was mutual interest between the two. B1G made some back channel contact with Mizzou but when Mizzou got a whif of "junior" membership, Mizzou was like "come back when you are serious." This was mainly because MU couldn't afford it like NU could.
After that, I guess B1G didn't expect Mizzou to have any other options and would be around for when the B1G did get serious. Wrong.
I don't think B1G really regrets anything they did too much. It would be interesting to know how it would have been different had the B1G been aware of SEC's interest in Mizzou.
This post was edited on 3/10/14 at 8:46 am
Posted on 3/10/14 at 4:37 pm to JesusQuintana
quote:
The AAC? Lol! WTF are you talking about? That NEVER would have happened.
And yet there was talk of Mizzou to the Big East, which became the AAC for the schools with football teams.
Sure Gee talked about wanting Mizzou, but his voice was not strong enough and he was out of a job shortly. B1G wanted to get into the east coast markets, and Mizzou did not offer that. Mizzou was just the opening gambit to get Nebraska to move. The biggest thing getting Mizzou in the SEC was the gentleman's not to raid the ACC, otherwise SEC would have added TAMU and VPI to get to 14. Lots of folks were pushing that scenario early on.
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News