re: SEC expansion

No way Louisville, Georgia Tech, Clemson, or Florida State would ever be serious contenders for a spot. Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, and South Carolina wont allow it. They all have under the table agreements to not allow their out of conference rivals in the conference.

The only two teams that even make sense are North Carolina State, and Virginia Tech.

North Carolina State would bring the SEC into the Raleigh market, and the Charlotte market. Plus, North Carolina State's athletic department has the money and facilities that are closely aligned to the SEC.

Virginia Tech is the bigger school of the two in Virginia, and their fanbase reaches across Richmond, the Hampton Roads area, DC, and even Charlotte. Their football team has a great history in the past two decades, and they could lock down recruiting in Virginia/DC with the SEC brand.

You add both of those teams to the east, and Missouri can move to the west.

quote:

---

I know this conference needs less damn Yankee states in it regardless of if they are a charter member.

---

Welcome back, 7. It's good to see you posting again.

Expansion is all about TV markets and expanding the SEC brand. You add a team from the midwest/southwest, Oklahoma or God forgive me,Texas if you can separate Oklahoma from Okla state. Or you bring in 2 east coast teams. Virginia/Virginia Tech or UNC/NC state. Then re-align east/west.

Lets add EVERY SINGLE FBS TEAM to the SEC!!!! TV Markets!!!! AHHHHH!!!!

quote:

---

Would Mizzou finally make geological sense and move to the west and put Auburn in the SEC East?

---

Am I the only one who thinks we should not take geology into consideration in determining conference divisional alignment?

quote:

---

There will be no east/west if the conference is expanded to 16 teams.

Also, NC St and Va Tech would be fall back plans if UVA and UNC won't come.

---

This.

I'm constantly amazed why people are excited about NC State btw. Outside of being good folks in general, having a decent basketball team, and an ok cultural fit they are a dud. They last won the weak arse ACC in 1979, they have a small stadium. They have very limited resources and their BOR is controlled by UNC. They are not in the AAU and are essentially average academically. They really have no sex appeal other than being in North Carolina.

VT is also not in the same stratosphere as UVA. UVA is one of the richest, most prestigious, and most powerful Public Universities in the country and certainly on the East Coast. They have a very well rounded athletic program though their football team has been mediocre. The key is though that if they simply decided to emphasize it they could become a power in short order. Remember as well that University Presidents do the voting, not AD's.

Drop Mizzou Add Clemson (SCar in state rivalry), add Georgia Tech back (UGA in state rivalry), add Louisville (UK in state rivalry, great for the basketball part of the conference).

West:

1. Alabama
2. Auburn
3. Ole Miss
4. Miss. State
5. LSU
6. Texas A&M
7. Arkansas
8. Vandy

East
1. Florida
2. Georgia
3. Georgia Tech
4. South Carolina
5. Clemson
6. Tennessee
7. Kentucky
8. Louisville

Main Rivalries
1. Alabama vs. Auburn
2. Ole Miss vs. Mississippi State
3. LSU vs. Florida
4. South Carolina vs. Clemson
5. Georgia vs. Georgia Tech
6. Kentucky vs. Louisville
7. Tennessee vs. Vandy
8. Texas A&M vs. Arkansas

NC State
Georgia
South Carolina
Florida


Tennessee
Vanderbilt
Va Tech
Kentucky

Auburn
Alabama
Mississippi State
Mississippi

LSU
Texas A&M
Arkansas
Mizzou

2 permanant games outside division when not playing that division and each division plays another on a three year rotation
For example
UGA schedule could look like this

NC State
South Carolina
Florida
Texas A&M
LSU
Mizzou
Arkansas
Auburn
Tennessee
OOC
OOC
OOC

quote:

---

Welcome back, 7. It's good to see you posting again.

---

Good to be back.

quote:

---

I see no reason to add schools who bring no monetary increase to the table simply because I would like to play them.

---

That's just fricking sad right there.

Yeah, God forbid I would want to add teams that I would actually enjoy watching LSU play. No, let's get some bullshite scrubs like NC State in here so we - er, I mean our schools, can make more money.

quote:

---

Your school (assuming you have an SEC affiliation) has benefited greatly from what you term "this Mizzou deal".

---

The OP didn't ask what teams my school would like to add, it asked, "who would you choose to be the newest SEC team?"

Like I said, I haven't made any more money due to adding Mizzou.

But I do wonder if adding an NC State, who might consistently make minor dontgiveashit.com bowls would bring in more money than a team like FSU who might go to more lucrative bowls, and the occasional playoff.

I wish we had taken FSU over Mizzou, and I really don't think the conference would've suffered financially for it. Not that I have anything against Mizzou, I just don't see them as Southeastern, and really not a great fit.

Plus, we already had too many 'Tigers' in the SEC, I could just see us adding Clemson and having a 4th Tiger team. Ugh.

quote:

---

The statements about 16 being better than 14 are true.

---

As are the statements about 12 being better than 14. As a matter of fact, 12 would be better than 16 as well.