Started By
Message
re: Conference Realignment
Posted on 2/12/10 at 10:33 am to bamawriter
Posted on 2/12/10 at 10:33 am to bamawriter
quote:
The SEC is a superconference already, so that doesn't help the argument.
There would be no point in adding teams from within the footprint because we're already in those TV markets, and that would dilute the TV package per team, so goodbye GT and FSU.
Adding Texas or OU would add markets, but it would be iffy if ESPN/CBS would want to pay more than the 3 billion they are paying now.
The SEC will be the one major conference that doesn't shakeup in the near future.
I wouldn't expect more money from the next tv contract. Heck unless the economy improves dramatically between now and then I'd be shocked if the SEC would get the same money.
The point is, the SEC isn't so strong that it couldn't be over taken by either an expanded Big Ten, Pac Ten, or both.
1
Posted on 2/12/10 at 10:36 am to Tennessee Jed
Its only in feb and this topic has already been brought up 7x already.Arkansas isn't going anywhere.
New TV Deal and 5 million a year to play aTm.
New TV Deal and 5 million a year to play aTm.
Posted on 2/12/10 at 10:41 am to TigersOfGeauxld
quote:
The point is, the SEC isn't so strong that it couldn't be over taken by either an expanded Big Ten, Pac Ten, or both.
I disagree. The strength of a conference is determined by two things: Recruiting and TV.
The SEC is tops in recruiting by a wide margin, and that's not likely to change anytime soon.
As far as TV goes, the Big 10 has a great deal, but it's not nearly as strong as the SEC's. They are only going to add one team, so they need that team to provide market presence that will strengthen their deal. Texas would fit that bill, as would Missouri to a lesser degree. Rutgers, Pitt, and Syracuse really do nothing to help. If the Big 10 gets Texas, then they may have enough ammo to draw even with the SEC. If it's Missouri they still lag behind.
The Pac10's TV deal is awful, and no major network is clamoring to offer more. The TV markets are weak outside of California. If they add Colorado and one of the Utah teams, then they pick up the Denver and SLC markets, but nothing more. The deal would get better, but would still be, at best, 4th behind the SEC, Ten, and XII.
Posted on 2/12/10 at 10:42 am to Tennessee Jed
quote:
They have a better basketball program right now than anyone in the SEC outside of Kentucky.
Questionable at best
quote:
I wouldn't expect more money from the next tv contract. Heck unless the economy improves dramatically between now and then I'd be shocked if the SEC would get the same money.
That is still a long ways off, I would certainly hope there is a change in the economy. However, if the SEC could add Texas there would be an increase in the deal. We would then have 2 of the 4 largest states, nobody would be able to pass on the deal.
This post was edited on 2/12/10 at 10:48 am
Posted on 2/12/10 at 10:44 am to bgator85
quote:
Questionable at best
This.
What does memphis bring in football and baseball.
Believe it or not sec plays more than one sport.
Posted on 2/12/10 at 10:47 am to pioneerbasketball
quote:
What does memphis bring in football and baseball.
This, and the SEC is already in the Memphis TV market. And I'm pretty sure the fact that they play their home games off-campus doesn't make them appealing. Memphis doesn't bring a damn thing to the table.
Posted on 2/12/10 at 10:49 am to Tennessee Jed
quote:
I'd say Memphis with SEC funding and local talent they could be better than Arkansas if given time to build their football program. Basketball is already top notch, and geographically it makes sense.
I'd much rather keep Arkansas than add Memphis. They bring nothing in terms of academic or historic prestige, football, baseball.. their basketball is okay but the SEC is doing fine with being mediocre in basketball save Kentucky.
Posted on 2/12/10 at 10:50 am to Rohan2Reed
If the conference ever added again, it has to go outside of the current states. Go into Texas, North Carolina or Virginia.
Posted on 2/12/10 at 10:53 am to bamawriter
quote:
I disagree. The strength of a conference is determined by two things: Recruiting and TV.
AFAIK BOTH conferences are wanting to add Texas, which would indeed change the dynamics of CFB in recruiting and market share. And NOT in the SEC's favor.
Right now, the SEC has one big state population-wise in Florida, where the Pac Ten has California and the Big XII has Texas. The BIg Ten has both Ohio and Pennsylvannia.
Add Texas to either the Pac Ten or the Big Ten and the SEC is dramatically out numbered in market share. As far as recruiting, adding talent-rich Texas recruits to either conference and the result is unpredicatble.
Lest we forget, both QB's in the BCS title game were from Texas. LSU won the BCS title with a Texas QB. UGA's Stafford was from Texas. The Saints just won a Super Bowl with a QB born in Texas.
I don't want the SEC to stand pat when it could not only grow stronger, but keep it's main rivals from growing stronger as well.
This post was edited on 2/12/10 at 11:04 am
Posted on 2/12/10 at 10:55 am to ItTakesAThief
quote:
I'd say Memphis with SEC funding and local talent they could be better than Arkansas if given time to build their football program
Um No.
Memphis sucks and will always suck. Memphis is a Basketball school and they aren't even very good at that this year.
They have a dilapidated stadium and no practice field. Their practice field is sometimes a private schools field.
Posted on 2/12/10 at 12:08 pm to bbvdd
If the SEC were to lose Arkansas and looking to add a team, it would have to be a team like Texas A&M or North Carolina.
Texas A&M is a team with a history, a large fan following and has a history with some teams in the SEC West. It would open up the Texas recruiting and television market.
North Carolina would be a possibility, the SEC would probably enjoy the revenue and prestige of the NC Basketball team.
SEC would never bring in a weak team like Memphis. The SEC would be looking for established teams who can bring in a large segment of fans and money. They would not be looking to bring in a program to have to dump money into to make it competitive.
Memphis does not have the facilities to compete in the SEC.
Texas A&M is a team with a history, a large fan following and has a history with some teams in the SEC West. It would open up the Texas recruiting and television market.
North Carolina would be a possibility, the SEC would probably enjoy the revenue and prestige of the NC Basketball team.
SEC would never bring in a weak team like Memphis. The SEC would be looking for established teams who can bring in a large segment of fans and money. They would not be looking to bring in a program to have to dump money into to make it competitive.
Memphis does not have the facilities to compete in the SEC.
This post was edited on 2/12/10 at 12:24 pm
Posted on 2/12/10 at 12:20 pm to ItTakesAThief
Virginia
Any of the North Carolina schools (unc, wake, duke and ncstate)
Virginia Tech wouldnt be a bad call IMO
Any of the North Carolina schools (unc, wake, duke and ncstate)
Virginia Tech wouldnt be a bad call IMO
Posted on 2/12/10 at 12:32 pm to Bryant91092
quote:This... Ark should never have been invited. They could compete with Texas and OU but they are in over their heads in the SEC. Tech has served enough time in 'football hell' since leaving the conference. We should allow them back in and boot Ark.
I would want Georgia Tech to be in the SEC
Now before you hawgs start the '3 in a row' BS, we beat you 3 in a row before that so STFU. Besides, what I'm referring to is winning the conference-something Ark will never do.
Posted on 2/12/10 at 12:35 pm to AUHank
Arkansas was a good pickup for the SEC and I hope they remain and expect them to, in fact.
I am hoping for expansion to a 14 team conference. I'm not an advocate of anyone leaving.
I think UK would be a better fit in the Big Ten than Arkansas in the Big XII, but I notice no one's suggesting that. Me neither.
I am hoping for expansion to a 14 team conference. I'm not an advocate of anyone leaving.
I think UK would be a better fit in the Big Ten than Arkansas in the Big XII, but I notice no one's suggesting that. Me neither.
Posted on 2/12/10 at 12:37 pm to AUHank
Your grasp of history and perspective is laughable. What has AU done? We've at least provided an NC in a major sport since joining. What has AU done?
Ross, catfish, and others I aplogize but this is a good example of why so many Ark fans are starting to hate AU.
Ross, catfish, and others I aplogize but this is a good example of why so many Ark fans are starting to hate AU.
This post was edited on 2/12/10 at 1:20 pm
Posted on 2/12/10 at 12:56 pm to ItTakesAThief
Clemson before Tech or Memphis.
Posted on 2/12/10 at 12:59 pm to ItTakesAThief
i still would go with Ga Tech or any one of the big Fla schools we could lure away from the ACC
Posted on 2/12/10 at 1:21 pm to Rohan2Reed
quote:
I'd much rather keep Arkansas than add Memphis
+1 . I like Arkansas in the SEC. They would never leave anyway. SEC=$$$$.
Posted on 2/12/10 at 1:43 pm to TigersOfGeauxld
quote:Me too. Keep who we got and add two: FSU and West Virginia. One for the East and one for the West. I think it would be kick-azz to have them on our schedules. And thinking really big, add two more - aTm and VaTech; west/east again. Monster conference then.
Arkansas was a good pickup for the SEC and I hope they remain
This post was edited on 2/12/10 at 1:45 pm
Posted on 2/12/10 at 2:58 pm to JawjaTigah
Texas is not going to the Big 11. It makes no sense for them and with the expense of travel and loss of revenue from just the OU and aTm games, it's stupid. Just because the Big 11 contacts a school doesn't mean shite. They're not leaving.
I could see Colorado bolting for the Pathetic-10.
I could see Colorado bolting for the Pathetic-10.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News