Started By
Message
re: College Football Live talking about conference expansion
Posted on 5/7/10 at 3:36 pm to Tennessee Jed
Posted on 5/7/10 at 3:36 pm to Tennessee Jed
Vandy only really via Baseball, and maybe Hoops, can recruit the same athlete that Tenn can in-state.
But, what if a school like Memphis or MTS could be allowed an SEC paycheck to build Football facilities and staff by, over time it would be a thorn at minimal, and if done astutely, could be a downright menace, to a thin Volunteer state recruiting that has long needed to go out-of-state to land ballers needed for the better Tenn Football eras.
Greater Nashville burbs and MTS, if in any marginally better conference and with better tv exposure, let alone the SEC, could be a sleeper/monster in the making in the coming decades.
But, what if a school like Memphis or MTS could be allowed an SEC paycheck to build Football facilities and staff by, over time it would be a thorn at minimal, and if done astutely, could be a downright menace, to a thin Volunteer state recruiting that has long needed to go out-of-state to land ballers needed for the better Tenn Football eras.
Greater Nashville burbs and MTS, if in any marginally better conference and with better tv exposure, let alone the SEC, could be a sleeper/monster in the making in the coming decades.
0
Posted on 5/7/10 at 4:04 pm to rebeltider
The only hypothetical Conference that even looked realistic was the ACC, imo. With USF, WVU, Rutgers and UConn. The BIG 10 just had too many teams. The Pac-10 just looked crazy with Kansas ans K-State. And Texas and OU to the SEC? C'mon. Those two teams are the heart of their Conference. That would be like taking Florida and Bama out of the SEC moving them to the ACC or whatever.
Posted on 5/7/10 at 4:05 pm to rebeltider
Ugh....
Add Texas, Texas A&M, Clemson, and Florida State.
Expand into Texas...solidify Carolina and Florida.
Add Texas, Texas A&M, Clemson, and Florida State.
Expand into Texas...solidify Carolina and Florida.
Posted on 5/7/10 at 5:54 pm to NIH
Add one from the west, and one to the East if anything.
A&M gets my vote.
frick Texas and OU.
A&M gets my vote.
frick Texas and OU.
Posted on 5/7/10 at 5:55 pm to wmr
i'm against any expansion but if we would have to add i'd want a program like a&m or clemson more so than texas/OU/Miami.
those programs both have rivalries with current sec programs(a&m-lsu/arky, SC-Clemson)and they wouldn't water things down.
those programs both have rivalries with current sec programs(a&m-lsu/arky, SC-Clemson)and they wouldn't water things down.
This post was edited on 5/7/10 at 5:58 pm
Posted on 5/7/10 at 5:56 pm to wmr
quote:
Add one from the west, and one to the East if anything.
If this is the case add aTm & Florida St.
Posted on 5/7/10 at 7:01 pm to Emilio7
I am disappointed in many of you, my SEC brethren, as I think you fail to see the big picture here.
You have to remember, this is all about money, and although it sounds greedy and unethical, this kind of money would usher the SEC in to what would truly be its golden era.
I've seen some of you say you'd like to add FSU and Clemson over Texas and aTm. Why? Texas's athletic revenue alone is greater than Clemson and FSU's combined. Here are revenues from schools I've seen mentioned along with the top SEC schools for comparison.
Texas 138,459,149
Tennessee 102,795,708
LSU 100,878,633
Alabama 100,302,512
Texas A&M 98,121,411
Florida 96,814,239
Auburn 87,001,413
Oklahoma 81,487,835
Florida State 74,417,324
Clemson 61,416,494
Oklahoma State 55,953,397
South Florida 37,986,171
What can we conclude from this list?
1. Whoever mentioned bringing in USF to the SEC needs to be taken out back and beaten. They would add absolutely nothing as far as image, athletics, academics, or income.
2. Texas and aTm >>>> Clemson and FSU. Look. These schools would bring in massive market share from Texas. No doubt with the addition of these two new institutions, the SEC would be in a mighty position to renegotiate its TV contracts with ESPN and CBS, raking in even more cash. Greater income means better coaching staff, better facilities(stadium expansions anyone?), and more available funding for recruiting leading to better players. Not only that, but it would increase exposure and blow SEC hype through the roof. Poll voters would be brain numb not to put the new SEC's champion in the NCG.
3. If, in order to get Texas and aTm, we need OU and OSU, so be it. Benefits far outweigh the costs.
You have to remember, this is all about money, and although it sounds greedy and unethical, this kind of money would usher the SEC in to what would truly be its golden era.
I've seen some of you say you'd like to add FSU and Clemson over Texas and aTm. Why? Texas's athletic revenue alone is greater than Clemson and FSU's combined. Here are revenues from schools I've seen mentioned along with the top SEC schools for comparison.
Texas 138,459,149
Tennessee 102,795,708
LSU 100,878,633
Alabama 100,302,512
Texas A&M 98,121,411
Florida 96,814,239
Auburn 87,001,413
Oklahoma 81,487,835
Florida State 74,417,324
Clemson 61,416,494
Oklahoma State 55,953,397
South Florida 37,986,171
What can we conclude from this list?
1. Whoever mentioned bringing in USF to the SEC needs to be taken out back and beaten. They would add absolutely nothing as far as image, athletics, academics, or income.
2. Texas and aTm >>>> Clemson and FSU. Look. These schools would bring in massive market share from Texas. No doubt with the addition of these two new institutions, the SEC would be in a mighty position to renegotiate its TV contracts with ESPN and CBS, raking in even more cash. Greater income means better coaching staff, better facilities(stadium expansions anyone?), and more available funding for recruiting leading to better players. Not only that, but it would increase exposure and blow SEC hype through the roof. Poll voters would be brain numb not to put the new SEC's champion in the NCG.
3. If, in order to get Texas and aTm, we need OU and OSU, so be it. Benefits far outweigh the costs.
Posted on 5/7/10 at 7:05 pm to DemGaters
The SEC is already in its golden era, gatortard. You don't win four straight BCSNCs in the dark ages...
Posted on 5/7/10 at 7:11 pm to NIH
quote:
The SEC is already in its golden era, gatortard. You don't win four straight BCSNCs in the dark ages
Currently, national championships are the ceiling to CFB greatness and we certainly have that share cornered you are correct. But if you expand your thinking my friend, you will realize that there is more out there for the taking.
I'm talking about TV ratings. More TV ratings, means more cash flow, means greater glory. SEC football would rival even the NFL in market capacity.
Edit: I might add that everything is cyclical to some degree and while we are definitely on a long and lasting upswing, we must take advantage of our power to capture the best deal possible and secure prestige.
This post was edited on 5/7/10 at 7:23 pm
Posted on 5/7/10 at 7:18 pm to DemGaters
A few of you have missed the point that I previously posted. It's in the Texas legislature that Texas and A&M have to be in the same conference. Something about funding and money or some shite, I don't know the specifics. But there's no way we would get one without the other.
Posted on 5/7/10 at 7:24 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
there's no way we would get one without the other.
And the problem is....?
Posted on 5/7/10 at 7:30 pm to WG_Dawg
quote:
Nobody from Texas should ever, EVER be in the SEC. Once again, they're not in the southeast and have no ties to this region.
I fail to see the break in continuity...
Posted on 5/7/10 at 7:30 pm to DemGaters
Yes, we're just going to nab all these money makers from these conferences with no problem. God damn, you're a moron. 
Posted on 5/7/10 at 7:36 pm to NIH
quote:
Yes, we're just going to nab all these money makers from these conferences with no problem.
I never said it would be easy. I never said it would be even remotely possible.
Personally, I think the chances are slim to none.
Does that mean you can't postulate on the future?
quote:
God damn, you're a moron.
I'm a thinker. One who doesn't like to rot in the redundancy of the status quo. You obviously are different.
This post was edited on 5/7/10 at 7:38 pm
Posted on 5/7/10 at 7:37 pm to rebeltider
I want to keep the SEC a regional thing, and I feel Texas and Oklahoma are too far west.
Why not Georgia Tech and FSU?
Why not Georgia Tech and FSU?
Posted on 5/7/10 at 7:42 pm to DemGaters
It's funny that you think you are a ''thinker'' for realizing this would be more money...i'm a ''thinker'' too, the sky is blue.
Most SEC fans realize the conference is fine as it is now and want to remain this way. We also know that most of thise talk of expansion is that...just talk. In the end I doubt the Big 10 adds more than a team or two and that will be that.
Most SEC fans realize the conference is fine as it is now and want to remain this way. We also know that most of thise talk of expansion is that...just talk. In the end I doubt the Big 10 adds more than a team or two and that will be that.
Posted on 5/7/10 at 7:44 pm to Ross
quote:
I want to keep the SEC a regional thing, and I feel Texas and Oklahoma are too far west.
Why not Georgia Tech and FSU?
Ga Tech opted out in the 60's. FSU wanted no part of us in the 90's. I know it will never happen, but if Texas and Oklahoma want in, then bring them in.
Posted on 5/7/10 at 7:44 pm to Ross
Same here. Anything outside of Arkansas and Louisiana is too far west, IMO.
Posted on 5/7/10 at 7:51 pm to NIH
Yes, it's not hard to see that more money would most likely come from conference expansion. My argument was not only that Texas and aTm would bring in more than Clemson and FSU but vastly more. Many didn't seem to realize this, or the benefits that would come along with it. It seemed as though most people were complaining about the distance, or the extinguishing of old rivalries. I can tell you being in one of the more remote parts of the SEC, long distance travel is just long distance travel after a point. And the SEC could set up a structure where all rivalries are maintained, while adding new and exciting ones as well.
You're getting there my amateur friend.
quote:
i'm a ''thinker'' too, the sky is blue
You're getting there my amateur friend.
This post was edited on 5/7/10 at 7:52 pm
Posted on 5/7/10 at 7:52 pm to rebeltider
I for one do not want any Texas teams in the sec... We would all lose tons of recruits from Texas that came here to play with the best
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News