This issue has been very, very complicated and a lot of things went on behind closed doors. I imagine a lot of people have different versions, and there's fragments of truth here and there. But, the two waves of expansion each had their own differing priorities. The second wave for instance clearly was more about adding TV sets and far less about just trying to add the top football products. My perspective on it had to do with the fact that I'd been playing with the idea prior to all the expansion talk, and I guess in part due to my arguing on behalf of Texas A&M to the SEC I was given some A&M insider info on the issue.Correct me if I'm don't get this right but the sec was looking at aTm, vt, and mizzou in that order when expansion looked possible. Vt then dropped out and aTm and mizzou made their intentions known. Mizzou got out of the big 12 smoothly because their contract was up, but Baylor tried to block aTm's early exit. I think it is here where ou started threatening Texas about leaving due to the lhn and the commissioner. From my understanding the sec flirted with ou but ou turned the sec down because of academic prestige, and thought the PAC 12 would welcome them in open arms. If that part is true the. Why should the sec even consider them when a North Carolina or Virginia school would bring in way more money?
I thought about that today, but figured both texas and oklahoma would jump to the PAC 12 and leave the other eight programs to fend for themselves in the new AAC, CUSA, MWC or Sunbelt.@finebaum According to @ESPN_Colin "The Big 5 in CFB is ready to be the Big 4... BigXII will evaporate, Oklahoma is SEC bound & the Pac12 wants Texas"
I certainly hope this is just Finebaum trying to generate something to talk about. But even if that is true, note the part about the Pac-12 wanting Texas, doesn't say it about Oklahoma... if they can get Texas without paying the price of adding a bunch of other teams that's a better deal for them, but there's still the Longhorn Network to deal with which is no small obstacle.@finebaum According to @ESPN_Colin "The Big 5 in CFB is ready to be the Big 4... BigXII will evaporate, Oklahoma is SEC bound & the Pac12 wants Texas"
That would be doubling down on bad, instead of one team from a state with 3.8 million, that would make it two. Just no financial sense there for the move at all. Also, I seriously doubt Texas A&M or other teams in the west would be overly fond of it, it doesn't open up new revenue for them, it doesn't open up new recruiting territory (Oklahoma already relies on recruiting Texas), it does nothing for them.If oklahoma does join the SEC that is 15 teams, so bring Okie state and make it 16 teams.
Close to it, yeah. Expansion at this point would all but insure a 9th conference game, which would make the toughest schedule even tougher. There's just not a lot out there that would be worth expanding for, North Carolina would generate more revenue and make the SEC better in basketball, an area it actually could benefit from improving.The only school left out there for the SEC worth the headache is North Carolina.
but which one do you want? UNC and Duke would be the biggest possible, but NC State and Wake wouldnt be horrible.The only school left out there for the SEC worth the headache is North Carolina.
Duke or UNC would be the best additions. I think OU acts entitiled just because the name. I think if they truly wanted to get away from Texas and they were as big time as they act they would go independent. But since they didnt it seems they are scared because Bevo holds all the cards. Texas has a future if an earthquake happens, Oklahoma doesnt.Close to it, yeah. Expansion at this point would all but insure a 9th conference game, which would make the toughest schedule even tougher. There's just not a lot out there that would be worth expanding for, North Carolina would generate more revenue and make the SEC better in basketball, an area it actually could benefit from improving.
Anyway, I was trying to feel out what was going on with Oklahoma and I wanted to read some of what was said on their part. I think they showed their hand a bit when Texas A&M left. They stated that they got offers from the SEC and Pac-12, and made it sound like they at that moment in time were weighing their options. Now, did the fact that they stayed indicate that may be the chances they were talking about are no longer there? They said the Pac-12 offered them an invite, and that was true, but the fact is it was part of a package deal with Texas! I never saw anything at all about a stand-alone invite, which really makes limited sense for the Pac-12 (just look at a map and consider adding Oklahoma by themselves).
So, it seems to me that Oklahoma's huff and puff about conferences wanted them might be exaggerating the nature of the invites. I certainly hope the same goes for the SEC, it's possible they at some point got a stand-alone invite, but there's no question that the SEC was pretty brisk in adding A&M and Missouri once A&M made up their mind, they didn't exactly stand there twiddling their thumbs waiting for Oklahoma. I think Oklahoma is unhappy with the current situation, and might be pressing for some changes in the Big 12, but I'm just not sure there are many conferences lining up like Oklahoma would lead some to believe.
I tend to agree. The more I think about it, the more I believe OU is just stuck. No one really wants them without Texas. I don't think that's wise, as Texas has a propensity to wreck conferences and ruin relationships, but they are the big money program that stands on their own. Oklahoma would be mediocre without their Texas recruiting pipeline, and they have attached themselves to the hips of the Longhorns because of it. They are much like Nebraska in their need to recruit out of state. Probably not as bad, but similar. I'm not trying to disparage their tradition and their loyal fan base. They would bring a lot to any conference they joined. The trouble is, no other power conference out their actually needs to expand. Absent a need, they would only expand for a cash cow like Texas or Notre Dame. Neither of those 2 are going anywhere due to their network deals.Duke or UNC would be the best additions. I think OU acts entitiled just because the name. I think if they truly wanted to get away from Texas and they were as big time as they act they would go independent. But since they didnt it seems they are scared because Bevo holds all the cards. Texas has a future if an earthquake happens, Oklahoma doesnt.
NC State would probably be a good add, Wake, meh we are already saddled with vanderbilt.but which one do you want? UNC and Duke would be the biggest possible, but NC State and Wake wouldnt be horrible.
If we get another western team then the most likely outcome would be mizzou and vandy to the west and bama and auburn to the east. Lsu would either get bama or auburn for permanent rivalries and the new west team would get the other. I tend to think if we get another two teams then the sec would go all out to get unc and duke. I just don't think the sec wants Oklahoma to be honest. It's mostly due to what does ou really bring to the table kinda thing. Ou really has football and softball but the other sports and the recruiting isn't there. I think the sec is more interested in a unc + duke or a nc state + virginia tech deal. The virginia and North Carolina markets are far more profitable than the okc marketThe Big 12 has been in trouble since the A&M/Mizzou defection. They actually started reeling when Nebraska left in my opinion. Big time schools like that are just not available to add to a conference every day. The Big 12 needs to add more schools or fold. Here is my take:
If the current 10 teams stay, the Big 12 needs to add BYU and Boise St. Both are good programs and add credibility to the football in addition to giving them the conference title game that they have to add.
If TX and OK leave, the Big 12 better be content with mid-major status. They could then add Memphis and Colorado St. They would still be a good conference in overall athletics, but just not qualify as something worthy of Power 5 status in football. At that point, they might as well add 2 more schools like SMU and Houston to move up to 14 teams because nobody is going to take them seriously in football. The conference would have huge presence in the state of Texas, just not with the Big 2 that is Bevo and TAMU. They would end up being the biggest mid-major conference but could still put a team in the playoff if they had someone worthy.
If OK does come to the SEC, who else are they going to add to balance out the conferences? I'm not sure Virginia Tech makes sense. I'm not sold on West Virginia either. Both of those schools dream about being in the SEC, but I'm not sure they are a good fit for the SEC. North Carolina makes the most sense academically (current scandal aside) and geographically, but they are not a football school. They would put pressure on Kentucky and Florida in basketball, but I would think that there would have to be realignment just for football. I mean, it would be playoff suicide for the SEC to just throw the Sooners in the West. The SEC champion could be a team from the West with two or three losses, and they are not getting in a playoff at that point.
Let's say that Carolina and OK does join to make 16. The realignment could look like:
East: Kentucky, Tennessee, South Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Vandy, Auburn, North Carolina
West: Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, A&M, Mizzou, Ole Miss, Miss St, Oklahoma
The Auburn and Mizzou swap just makes sense geographically. Drop NC in the East and OK in the West and be done with it. Alabama would have to lose the Tennessee game and replace that with the Auburn game for yearly inter-conference game. UT would just have to go into the rotation with the rest of them.
This realignment talk is great for the offseason.
I tend to agree with this. OU has had some pretty good basketball teams over the past 20 years, not Kentucky or Florida good, but certainly better than most of the SEC teams. IMO it would be next to impossible to pull Duke, UNC and/or UVA from the ACC.If we get another western team then the most likely outcome would be mizzou and vandy to the west and bama and auburn to the east. Lsu would either get bama or auburn for permanent rivalries and the new west team would get the other. I tend to think if we get another two teams then the sec would go all out to get unc and duke. I just don't think the sec wants Oklahoma to be honest. It's mostly due to what does ou really bring to the table kinda thing. Ou really has football and softball but the other sports and the recruiting isn't there. I think the sec is more interested in a unc + duke or a nc state + virginia tech deal. The virginia and North Carolina markets are far more profitable than the okc market
I know it wasn't directed at me, I'd take North Carolina first, then NC State and Duke are pretty close. I'd say this though, the SEC should only add one NC team if it comes down to it, even NC and Oklahoma is better than two NC programs.but which one do you want? UNC and Duke would be the biggest possible, but NC State and Wake wouldnt be horrible.
I think Oklahoma, and perhaps some conferences are still stuck in the pre-network era, and not just that but in an era in which recruiting itself was different. Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Michigan, it was a given that programs like these would be amongst the best. It takes more than just having a "brand" now.I think OU acts entitiled just because the name
I think it was a huge mistake to do what Oklahoma did, and what Oklahoma did should be pointed out here (again). The Big 8 headquarters were in Missouri, Oklahoma played Nebraska annually. There's no real reason Oklahoma should have allowed Texas to come in, take away their game with Nebraska, move the headquarters to Texas and so on. Remember, Texas was coming off of destroying one conference, but Oklahoma clearly sided with Texas and has that made Oklahoma any better? It doesn't seem to but it's no longer clear that Oklahoma is really worth much without Texas. At least Oklahoma State has someone who is insanely rich backing them, Oklahoma has... Texas.I tend to agree. The more I think about it, the more I believe OU is just stuck. No one really wants them without Texas. I don't think that's wise, as Texas has a propensity to wreck conferences and ruin relationships, but they are the big money program that stands on their own.
Absolutely correct, the fact is that had the Pac-12 deal happened, there would have been no Big 12. With Nebraska headed to the Big 10, and the deal on the table for 6 teams to join the Pac-12 they would have simply voted to disband to avoid any penalties for leaving the conference. As to why things reached that point, well the last paragraph alludes to that, but keep in mind that it was another instance in which Texas was ready, willing, and able to screw over programs like Kansas and Missouri.They actually started reeling when Nebraska left in my opinion.
Adding Oklahoma and Virginia Tech could go very poorly. First we have Oklahoma, a football power from a small state with little else on the resume. They have great financial merit, but either they push down programs like LSU and make them weaker, or they get weaker in which case they just become a team from a small state (like Ole Miss). They're valuable to some conferences (like the ACC), but I don't see the value for the SEC.If OK does come to the SEC, who else are they going to add to balance out the conferences? I'm not sure Virginia Tech makes sense. I'm not sold on West Virginia either. Both of those schools dream about being in the SEC, but I'm not sure they are a good fit for the SEC. North Carolina makes the most sense academically (current scandal aside) and geographically, but they are not a football school. They would put pressure on Kentucky and Florida in basketball, but I would think that there would have to be realignment just for football. I mean, it would be playoff suicide for the SEC to just throw the Sooners in the West. .
A lot of people seem to think you couldn't separate UNC and Duke, but a pair of teams from one state is a large price to pay. Now, you could argue convincingly that UNC+Duke is better than Oklahoma+Okie State, or even Oklahoma+West Virginia, however a deal with the premier programs in each state (North Carolina and Virginia) is still far better overall.II tend to think if we get another two teams then the sec would go all out to get unc and duke. I just don't think the sec wants Oklahoma to be honest. It's mostly due to what does ou really bring to the table kinda thing. Ou really has football and softball but the other sports and the recruiting isn't there. I think the sec is more interested in a unc + duke or a nc state + virginia tech deal. The virginia and North Carolina markets are far more profitable than the okc market
Money? Once the SEC Network really gets rolling, the financial incentive alone should be rather compelling. I do agree that those programs are not exactly dying to leave, but if the SEC could pull another piece loose first, getting a North Carolina could become possible.I don't see Duke or North Carolina leaving the ACC. Why would they? Besides, they are too, how should I say, proud to do that.
Decent analysis, it's hard to argue too compellingly against a tandem of NC State and Virginia Tech and State supports their football program better than many realize. I still think there's a bit of a risk in taking the lesser programs in a state though. With Texas A&M, it was such a huge state and such a rich program that it wasn't much of a risk, but we're talking about a smaller pie here though. I'm not sure if they're quite enough to make them the final pieces in an expanded conference, and it feels a bit like low hanging fruit. If the SEC can't get North Carolina (or the really long-shot Notre Dame), I'm not so sure they shouldn't stand pat.NC State, on the other hand just might - even given the exit fee.
So looking back east VT is the only school I see making sense overall after State. Another new state with over 8 million new people in a truly Southeastern state. Football attendance of 61k. Bringing both VY and State in would allow Mizzou to move West, a more natural fit for them, although it would hurt their chances at making another SECCG anytime soon.
I had forgotten about that bit of information. Oklahoma really threw the Big 8 under the bus by doing that. I believe Colorado also sided with Texas in that move. The vote was 7-5. Seems like only Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, Kansas State, and Iowa State voted for the conference headquarters to stay in St. Louis. The reality of the situation is that even though the Big 8 officially dissolved (the Big 12 didn't retain the Big 8's history as its own), they still saved Texas from the SWC. Yet, they sold out to Texas. So OU made its bed back then and now they're sleeping in it.I think it was a huge mistake to do what Oklahoma did, and what Oklahoma did should be pointed out here (again). The Big 8 headquarters were in Missouri, Oklahoma played Nebraska annually. There's no real reason Oklahoma should have allowed Texas to come in, take away their game with Nebraska, move the headquarters to Texas and so on. Remember, Texas was coming off of destroying one conference, but Oklahoma clearly sided with Texas and has that made Oklahoma any better? It doesn't seem to but it's no longer clear that Oklahoma is really worth much without Texas. At least Oklahoma State has someone who is insanely rich backing them, Oklahoma has... Texas.