1
Started By
Message
re: The Next Conference Expansion: Mizzou Perspective.
Posted on 7/13/15 at 11:05 am to RocketBallz
Posted on 7/13/15 at 11:05 am to RocketBallz
They certainly believe this is still the days of Switzer don't they?
Personally, I don't mind OU in the SEC. Better than some alternatives. Obviously, NC/VA are the first 2 choices but if that's not realistic, what names are you really looking at?
Not a chance(or I hope not) that OSU or tejas join. I'd be shocked if kU joined. They are so out of the culture fit, have absolutely no football program, and personally I think their basketball program will get exposed a bit, especially if UF can get it together under a new HC. They would be the 3rd best program in the conference and I don't think their egos are ready for that.
Personally, I don't mind OU in the SEC. Better than some alternatives. Obviously, NC/VA are the first 2 choices but if that's not realistic, what names are you really looking at?
Not a chance(or I hope not) that OSU or tejas join. I'd be shocked if kU joined. They are so out of the culture fit, have absolutely no football program, and personally I think their basketball program will get exposed a bit, especially if UF can get it together under a new HC. They would be the 3rd best program in the conference and I don't think their egos are ready for that.
Posted on 7/13/15 at 9:21 pm to reedus23
I've been reading this thread, and there are some good thoughts. For what little my opinion is worth...
1. OU to the SEC is contingent on them separating from Okie Lite. I see no way the SEC takes both. UNLESS the Big 12 dissolves and power conferences move to 20 members. As has been said. And in that scenario, UWV also becomes a possibility. The academics of Okie Lite and UVW are problematic in an SEC trying to bolster their academic profile.
2. kU would be a terrible fit in the SEC. I see no way this happens. Even if it was discussed, I can't see kU wanting to join this conference, for many reasons. Square peg, round hole, moving on.
3. The preferred footprint moves east, not further west. I think OU would be at least 5th on the wish list, after UVA, UNC, VT, NCST. Maybe others.
4. There is no reason for the SEC to expand right now. This is a chess game. I don't see the SEC making any moves until it B1G or PAC goes first. The SEC won't show their hand first. But, as before, I would expect us to be winners in the Expansion Sweepstakes.
5. Lastly, the question of whether OU to the SEC is good for Mizzou is an interesting one. After thinking it over, I tend to come down slightly on the "no" side. I think it would hurt our long term efforts to boost our football profile. There would be good things about having them in the SEC, but in terms of football reputation, it's one more rung to step over on the ladder we're trying to climb.
1. OU to the SEC is contingent on them separating from Okie Lite. I see no way the SEC takes both. UNLESS the Big 12 dissolves and power conferences move to 20 members. As has been said. And in that scenario, UWV also becomes a possibility. The academics of Okie Lite and UVW are problematic in an SEC trying to bolster their academic profile.
2. kU would be a terrible fit in the SEC. I see no way this happens. Even if it was discussed, I can't see kU wanting to join this conference, for many reasons. Square peg, round hole, moving on.
3. The preferred footprint moves east, not further west. I think OU would be at least 5th on the wish list, after UVA, UNC, VT, NCST. Maybe others.
4. There is no reason for the SEC to expand right now. This is a chess game. I don't see the SEC making any moves until it B1G or PAC goes first. The SEC won't show their hand first. But, as before, I would expect us to be winners in the Expansion Sweepstakes.
5. Lastly, the question of whether OU to the SEC is good for Mizzou is an interesting one. After thinking it over, I tend to come down slightly on the "no" side. I think it would hurt our long term efforts to boost our football profile. There would be good things about having them in the SEC, but in terms of football reputation, it's one more rung to step over on the ladder we're trying to climb.
Posted on 7/14/15 at 5:14 am to semotruman
quote:
5. Lastly, the question of whether OU to the SEC is good for Mizzou is an interesting one. After thinking it over, I tend to come down slightly on the "no" side. I think it would hurt our long term efforts to boost our football profile. There would be good things about having them in the SEC, but in terms of football reputation, it's one more rung to step over on the ladder we're trying to climb.
Agreed. Looking (and hoping) long-term, it would be nice to have another 10-20 years to establish Mizzou as a national brand. Bringing one in from the outside (and from our West) would likely undercut it.
And the arrogance of these Sooners is incredible. They've allowed themselves to become the lap dog of Texas, yet they still think they'll dictate terms to the SEC or any other conference they join. It's high comedy.
I really want to see them separated from the Whorns to rot and wither like NU.
Posted on 7/14/15 at 7:06 am to Mizz-SEC
Their arrogance is overwhelming and always has been. They're another program that hasn't yet accepted that the landscape has changed.
And as if we needed another reason for them not to be in the SEC... Boomer Sooner.
And as if we needed another reason for them not to be in the SEC... Boomer Sooner.
Posted on 7/14/15 at 8:50 am to semotruman
Both Texas and OU are a shell of what they use to be, and its because of their arrogance.
They use to both be marquee programs. Their fans will tell you that they are but, no, they're not.
It's like seeing someone really great years later that are now addicts.
OU gave it all up to be Texas' personal assistant. Whatever Texas does, OU has been saying "yes".
Texas is like an addict taking money from LHN at the expense of exposure and having to compete on level playing field.
Texas has some of the most fertile recruiting grounds but struggles against Baylor and A&M.
Stoops is the 5th highest paid HC, and is finding recruiting in B12 isn't what it use to be.
They use to both be marquee programs. Their fans will tell you that they are but, no, they're not.
It's like seeing someone really great years later that are now addicts.
OU gave it all up to be Texas' personal assistant. Whatever Texas does, OU has been saying "yes".
Texas is like an addict taking money from LHN at the expense of exposure and having to compete on level playing field.
Texas has some of the most fertile recruiting grounds but struggles against Baylor and A&M.
Stoops is the 5th highest paid HC, and is finding recruiting in B12 isn't what it use to be.
Posted on 7/14/15 at 11:11 am to JesusQuintana
The problem with any NorthCarolina/Virginia schools for SEC expansion is that the ACC is already an ESPN property. Why would ESPN be willing to pay more to the SEC conference for product they already have? The ACC could fall apart, but it would be from the Big10's initial action...not the SECs.
Plus the ACC's Grant of Rights is a very expensive head-scratcher. It would make a lot more financial sense to do nothing for the next decade until the GORs sliding scale buyout clause is substantially less. Yes, Maryland took the plunge, but their court proceedings didn't go as cheaply as they had hoped.
Plus the ACC's Grant of Rights is a very expensive head-scratcher. It would make a lot more financial sense to do nothing for the next decade until the GORs sliding scale buyout clause is substantially less. Yes, Maryland took the plunge, but their court proceedings didn't go as cheaply as they had hoped.
Posted on 7/14/15 at 11:21 am to semotruman
I agree with you Semo. Especially on kU. I think they will end up getting a big10 invite because they were able to hang on to their AAU status and would be a good fit for that basketball league.
Posted on 7/14/15 at 11:24 am to semotruman
quote:
And as if we needed another reason for them not to be in the SEC... Boomer Sooner.
Posted on 7/14/15 at 1:17 pm to everytrueson
quote:
I think they will end up getting a big10 invite because they were able to hang on to their AAU status and would be a good fit for that basketball league.
I will giggle if it's another "junior membership" deal.
And kilo - I know, right? That excuse for a fight song is fingernails on a chalkboard to me.
Posted on 7/14/15 at 1:28 pm to 50CalMG
50...it's not that ESPN would pay more necessarily but wouldn't those monies be going to the SEC instead of the ACC? In other words, if ESPN place a value on those schools at $1, wouldn't they pay that same $1 but pay it to the SEC?
I do agree though. I don't see the ACC disintegrating. It's clearly the B12 on the ropes, if any at all, which I'm not even convinced of.
I do agree though. I don't see the ACC disintegrating. It's clearly the B12 on the ropes, if any at all, which I'm not even convinced of.
Posted on 7/14/15 at 1:33 pm to reedus23
quote:
50...it's not that ESPN would pay more necessarily but wouldn't those monies be going to the SEC instead of the ACC? In other words, if ESPN place a value on those schools at $1, wouldn't they pay that same $1 but pay it to the SEC?
I think he is saying that ESPN won't risk losing the other 13 schools dollars by allowing a switch to the SEC. SEC is their football moneybag...and the ACC is their basketball cow.
quote:
I don't see the ACC disintegrating
The only way that happens is if the B1G strikes first. Which if that happens, puts the SEC behind the ball.
quote:
It's clearly the B12 on the ropes, if any at all, which I'm not even convinced of
I think these next 4 years will tell us if the Big12 survives. If they don't add at least 2 respectable schools.....prepare for the feast!
Posted on 7/14/15 at 4:26 pm to reedus23
quote:
reedus23
quote:
it's not that ESPN would pay more necessarily but wouldn't those monies be going to the SEC instead of the ACC? In other words, if ESPN place a value on those schools at $1, wouldn't they pay that same $1 but pay it to the SEC?
My logic is that if two NC or Virginia schools joined the SEC. Then those schools must bring enough revenue to the conference within the "look-in" clause to negotiate a higher payout from ESPN to keep the current 14 schools with at least as much revenue as today. Yet, theoretically not hamper ESPN's current investment/payout with a damaged ACC. No conference is going to add 1-2 schools without immediately renegotiating their media contracts. Conversely, the media companies will immediately re-negotiate the contracts with any conference that loses teams. Even if it magically resolves to a zero-sum game, no one likes renegotiating, which unto itself is expensive.
In other words, why would ESPN want to renegotiate the current SEC contract (pay more) when their ACC property was proportionately decreased in value? It's a no-win situation from ESPN's perspective on trading properties between SEC and ACC.
I look at conference realignment as a chess match between ESPN and FoxSports (SEC vs Big10) fighting over live entertainment to sell the most valuable advertising time slots. Think of Sankey and Delaney as full colonels in the field. The 4 star generals that really make the decisions are at Disney(ESPN) / 21Century Fox. The real game is how ESPN / Fox fight to acquire their competitors properties while defending their current properties.
This post was edited on 7/14/15 at 5:01 pm
Posted on 7/14/15 at 7:47 pm to 50CalMG
quote:
The problem with any NorthCarolina/Virginia schools for SEC expansion is that the ACC is already an ESPN property. Why would ESPN be willing to pay more to the SEC conference for product they already have?
To double up on in-state footprint rates in NC and VA with an SEC and ACC Network.
That's why my inclination is if the XII disintegrates, OU and NC State could come go to the SEC while Texas takes the Notre Dame route of going semi-independent in football and an ACC member in all other sports.
If you're right that the cable networks are going to orchestrate this... ESPN could keep the Longhorn Network, start an ACC Network and increase the footprint of the SEC Network by shuffling one school to and from the ACC. Plus NC State escapes their double little brother status to Duke and North Carolina.
The only loser would be Fox losing OU to the SEC. Unless of course, Fox outbids CBS for their SEC contract. Then OU to the SEC makes them a ton of money, too.
Am I off base on this supposition?
Posted on 7/14/15 at 8:59 pm to Mizz-SEC
I agree with some of the main points in the last two posts. ESPN would love to maximize revenue by moving some schools around, but they do not want to destabilize the ACC. They would like to make the ACC stronger and increase the SEC footprint. ESPN definitely would prefer the BIG 12 and Fox be the losers in this.
Posted on 7/15/15 at 8:32 am to Tigersessed
quote:
ESPN would love to maximize revenue by moving some schools around, but they do not want to destabilize the ACC. They would like to make the ACC stronger and increase the SEC footprint. ESPN definitely would prefer the BIG 12 and Fox be the losers in this.
The safe play for ESPN, and the smart one as far as keeping their TWO conferences stable is a Big12 raid. Not only would they be extending their footprint, they would also be putting a dent in Fox's college football business.
If ESPN has anything to do with it (some I suspect)...they are pushing west, not east. They already have the east, they want the whole country.
Posted on 7/15/15 at 11:34 am to 5thTiger
quote:Agreed.
a Big12 raid
Here are my assumptions.
1) End game is 4 conferences.
2) B1G, SEC, PAC are not losing anyone
3) BigTwataver is more fragile than ACC
4) No raiding for several years until GORs penalties are contractually reduced toward the end of their term. Before then, and you could have costly and time consuming litigation (e.g. Baylor).
5) Bevo is NOT relinquishing BevoTV for the Big12's greater good...the $15m/yr is just too good.
6) Some teams will be left out of the eventual P4. (I do hope Iowa State finds a good home. I don't care about any other school)
7) I predict Kansas to B1G. Whorns to be semi-independent with ACC akin to Notre Dame. I don't see OU / OSU going to the same conference, but they could be split up if both find P4 homes, but where each goes, I couldn't guess.
Lastly, and most importantly. I'm so happy that Mizzou is in the SEC.
Posted on 7/15/15 at 11:44 am to 50CalMG
quote:
I look at conference realignment as a chess match between ESPN and FoxSports (SEC vs Big10)
True.
ESPN has SECN, ACC 1&2 Tiers and most of Tier 3.
Also has LHN and Jayhawk Network which are Tier 3.
Fox has Big 12 Tier 1&2 and OU's Tier 3 network.
BTN is owned by B1G, but works with ESPN.
There is a case to be made, that if ESPN has any influence or pull, it would love to see the B12 implode with schools going to ACC and SEC, creating a P4 and forcing Fox out.
Posted on 7/15/15 at 7:51 pm to Stlox
Goes to what I said on the last page... ESPN facilitates a move where the ACC gets Texas, Oklahoma, Texas tech, and either kU or OSU. The SEC gets VT and NCST.
It gives the ACC teams with enough clout that a new ACC network actually works and makes money. It gives the SEC the wanted footprint in the east. And gives ESPN the big FU to Fox.
It gives the ACC teams with enough clout that a new ACC network actually works and makes money. It gives the SEC the wanted footprint in the east. And gives ESPN the big FU to Fox.
Posted on 7/17/15 at 2:56 pm to Tigersessed
quote:
I agree with some of the main points in the last two posts. ESPN would love to maximize revenue by moving some schools around, but they do not want to destabilize the ACC. They would like to make the ACC stronger and increase the SEC footprint. ESPN definitely would prefer the BIG 12 and Fox be the losers in this.
You're right, but I wish this wasn't the case.
I honestly don't mind the prospect of OU in the SEC, but there isn't a single other Big 12 school that would fit the footprint that I want to see in the SEC.
kU? Ha, kindly frick off. Makes zero sense culturally. Football program is an abortion and is light years behind the rest of the SEC.
Okie Light? Bring nothing to the table that OU doesn't already cover.
Texas can go frick itself.
Texas Tech has weak academics, doesn't bring any new markets, and isn't particularly good at anything.
Baylor and TCU are small, religiously-affiliated schools that bring no new markets.
Kansas State and Iowa State will find themselves in MWC if the Big 12 collapses as a consequence of being little brothers in already undesirable expansion states.
WVU has already been shot down once by the SEC, I don't see that move happening.
Therefore, I wish that eastward expansion was currently a more realistic option. Virginia + NC State for me, please.
Posted on 7/17/15 at 7:26 pm to BreakawayZou83
quote:In a perfect world, something would happen. Virginia is the hard state to crack. Basically you have UVA or VT as the only 2 schools that have football.
Therefore, I wish that eastward expansion was currently a more realistic option
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News