Lets assume that the Big 12 dies off soon

tide96

All-SEC
Oct 4, 2005
1,616
32
72
46
TCU and Baylor? Talk about chasing the new money. These teams were nothing 5 years ago. Let's take someone that is more established.

West Virginia was the new hotness not too long ago.
 

champions77

Scout Team
Sep 6, 2006
149
0
0
Norman, Ok
Should the SEC foolishly decide to look at 2 schools from the same state, especially a smaller one, I'd think they'd first consider adding one where it already has a presence, probably the state of Texas. Either way that screams of desperation and we all know the SEC it far from that. The league holds all the cards. Any move must make financial sense before anything else.
Cullman I've heard for ever that the SEC has in their bylaws that a school in the SEC has veto rights over the addition of another school from the same state. Is this not the case? If it is, then I can assure you that A&M would never sign off on adding Texas. They moved to the SEC in a large part to escape Texas. And believe me they are enjoying the recruiting advantages they have too.
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,286
30,907
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
TCU and Baylor? Talk about chasing the new money. These teams were nothing 5 years ago. Let's take someone that is more established.

West Virginia was the new hotness not too long ago.
West Virginia actually has a fairly long history of football success. They have the most wins of any program that hasn't yet won a national title. I don't really think they fit into a conference out there like they did the old Big East, though. That's why I think, in any sort of doomsday scenario for the Big 12, they may find a home in the ACC and can rekindle some old Big East rivalries there such as Pittsburgh. It would be a long shot, though.
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,286
30,907
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
Cullman I've heard for ever that the SEC has in their bylaws that a school in the SEC has veto rights over the addition of another school from the same state. Is this not the case? If it is, then I can assure you that A&M would never sign off on adding Texas. They moved to the SEC in a large part to escape Texas. And believe me they are enjoying the recruiting advantages they have too.
It's a "Gentleman's agreement," not a bylaw.

The SEC wanted Florida State back in the day. Bobby Bowden preferred the ACC due to the easier schedule.
 

CullmanTide

Hall of Fame
Jan 7, 2008
6,614
885
137
Cullman, Al
Cullman I've heard for ever that the SEC has in their bylaws that a school in the SEC has veto rights over the addition of another school from the same state. Is this not the case? If it is, then I can assure you that A&M would never sign off on adding Texas. They moved to the SEC in a large part to escape Texas. And believe me they are enjoying the recruiting advantages they have too.
As Tide Engineer said it is a gentlemen's agreement. That's part of my point, it being such a long shot adding Oklahoma and OSU. Texas would be a cancer anyway. If one was added I was thinking more of TCU or Baylor.
 
Last edited:

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
Cowherd and finebaum are more stirring the post than stating real truths. I think there are boosters and board members from ou that truly
Want to go to the sec but I don't think the sec feels the same way. Take for example the last time expansion happened. The sec knew it wanted aTm but was pitching to vt and Missouri and not ou. That more or less tells me that the sec valued the stl/ kc and dc markets more than the okc market. Granted mizzou was free to leave due to their contract and wanted to leave the year prior if Nebraska didn't take their spot. I really think expansion other than to the PAC 12 for any team not named Texas or nd isn't going to be swift and easy like the last expansions. Ou is going to have to sell the need for the okc market in order to have the upper hand in discussions
 

CullmanTide

Hall of Fame
Jan 7, 2008
6,614
885
137
Cullman, Al
I do not believe the SEC wanted Texas. They did want OU. I don't think much has changed in that regard. I don't think the SEC would take any other Texas school at this point unless every other option fell through.
You are right about the Texas schools being down the list but there was a time the SEC coveted the Longhorns (prior to adding Arkansas and USC). The league will look to the east first, then Texas. I really can't see Oklahoma as being a target even with their history.
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,286
30,907
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
You are right about the Texas schools being down the list but there was a time the SEC coveted the Longhorns (prior to adding Arkansas and USC). The league will look to the east first, then Texas. I really can't see Oklahoma as being a target even with their history.
I've read in the past that Texas, Texas A&M, Miami, and Florida State were all being considered before the SEC settled on Arkansas and South Carolina.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
I've read in the past that Texas, Texas A&M, Miami, and Florida State were all being considered before the SEC settled on Arkansas and South Carolina.
I know Miami and fsu were. It made logical sense back then to get a dynasty and a rising power. But I heard Florida had a big say in both not joining and Bowden was against it.
 

champions77

Scout Team
Sep 6, 2006
149
0
0
Norman, Ok
Cowherd and finebaum are more stirring the post than stating real truths. I think there are boosters and board members from ou that truly
Want to go to the sec but I don't think the sec feels the same way. Take for example the last time expansion happened. The sec knew it wanted aTm but was pitching to vt and Missouri and not ou. That more or less tells me that the sec valued the stl/ kc and dc markets more than the okc market. Granted mizzou was free to leave due to their contract and wanted to leave the year prior if Nebraska didn't take their spot. I really think expansion other than to the PAC 12 for any team not named Texas or nd isn't going to be swift and easy like the last expansions. Ou is going to have to sell the need for the okc market in order to have the upper hand in discussions
So the SEC pitched to A&M and Mizzou/VT before OU ? With all due respect I heard from the git go that the SEC wanted A&M and OU, even the A&M fans were saying that. I never heard Mizzou mentioned until after OU rejected the offer. Mizzou pursued the SEC vigorously only after it appeared that four Big XII teams were going to the PAC, effectively dissolving the Big XII. Mizzou had already been rejected by the B1G, in favor of Nebraska so Mizzou was not going to be left behind again. Smart move on their part. Doing much better than anyone had projected in the East, albeit the SEC east is down.
 

CullmanTide

Hall of Fame
Jan 7, 2008
6,614
885
137
Cullman, Al
I've read in the past that Texas, Texas A&M, Miami, and Florida State were all being considered before the SEC settled on Arkansas and South Carolina.
I'm not sure they were ever that serious about Miami but you are correct on the other 3. I'm glad things worked out the way they did because we got A&M without Texas. I still think Arkansas and South Carolina turned out to be good additions.
 

CullmanTide

Hall of Fame
Jan 7, 2008
6,614
885
137
Cullman, Al
So the SEC pitched to A&M and Mizzou/VT before OU ? With all due respect I heard from the git go that the SEC wanted A&M and OU, even the A&M fans were saying that. I never heard Mizzou mentioned until after OU rejected the offer. Mizzou pursued the SEC vigorously only after it appeared that four Big XII teams were going to the PAC, effectively dissolving the Big XII. Mizzou had already been rejected by the B1G, in favor of Nebraska so Mizzou was not going to be left behind again. Smart move on their part. Doing much better than anyone had projected in the East, albeit the SEC east is down.
They sent out feelers to a lot of schools to gauge interest but you are right Oklahoma was offered first along with the Aggies. Missouri has prospered.
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,286
30,907
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
I'm not sure they were ever that serious about Miami but you are correct on the other 3. I'm glad things worked out the way they did because we got A&M without Texas. I still think Arkansas and South Carolina turned out to be good additions.
I agree. They have both improved their programs and helped the SEC improve it's overall product. I feel the additions of Missouri and Texas A&M will prove to be the same kind of relationships.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
I am not sure how this plays out as any of us are. But I think the economics of further conference realignment are much deeper and more complicated than just the number of TV sets in a given state. Regardless of the structure, each major conference except for the Big 12 has a conference network. Now that those networks have been formed, the business intelligence from those networks is piling up details on viewership, etc. I think the value of further realignment becomes more marginal and not pro-rata. You cant absorb UNC and except to just move 1/14 of the revenue share over to the SEC ledger. I think the value of further realignment comes in the secondary sports and I think the conferences are beginning to understand this and see the value of those sports as being undervalued.
I have to kind of stop you here and say I think you are pretty accurate in your assessment. This is more than just adding TV sets. If it was, then we'd just say add Syracuse (though that is an intriguing option) and Eastern Carolina and be done with it. But, I would point out that my analysis of the matter pre-dated the conference networks, and has always included a myriad of factors. You have to take contiguous states into account, this creates rivalries and bridges from one program to another. You have to take attendance into account, this shows the level of fan interest. You have to take athletic department revenue into account, this shows the overall health of the athletic department. Are they the premier program in the state? Where do they rank within the state in terms of relevance? You might even take a peak at their endowment, see how their financials are, and their academic stature has some relevance. This is, absolutely about what they bring to the table in total, not just how many people live in the state, or how many football games their team has won.

I understand the frustration with adding OU and OSU from a football standpoint. But I am telling you a renewed rivalry with OU-A&M-ARK would be extremely valuable for the conference. Plus both programs OU and OSU would be in the upper half of the conference in terms of basketball competitiveness not to mention some recent success in baseball and softball for both schools. Move Auburn to the East and you have solved the scheduling problem. I dont think its any coincidence that the SEC wants to improve its basketball brand with the origination of the network - they have to have something for somebody to watch during some other time of the year than football season. A conference basketball lineup featuring Kentucky, Florida, Missouri, OU, and OSU along with everybody else would be a vast improvement over what we have now.
This is where we start to differ a bit. It isn't so much that I don't see any value to OU in the conference, it's just that the things you are saying about them can apply to other schools as well. For instance, let's take North Carolina. Success in baseball, and one of the top brands in the country. Consider this, Oklahoma and Arkansas combined have a population of 6.7 million. You appear to be arguing on behalf of adding two Oklahoma schools, so that's a three school relationship for 6.7 million potential fans.

Kentucky+North Carolina would be 14.3 million. You think for one second that the Kentucky+NC rivalry wouldn't instantly become massive, in basketball of course but that it wouldn't spill over to other sports as well? It would be huge, there's no question about that. So, a lot of the stuff you're selling here would apply to North Carolina as well. There's no way around it, and in truth simply as a matter of branding, the North Carolina brand rivals the Oklahoma brand. I haven't included this before, I've kind of guessed at it, but North Carolina is #10 in apparel sales, Oklahoma is #12. North Carolina is #2 in the ACC in revenue, they have a well rounded athletic program, one that doesn't need football success and would improve the SEC in several sports, they have ready-made rivals in Kentucky and South Carolina.

So, I kind of get your point, I do... but the thing is Oklahoma just isn't sitting at the top of the heap when it comes to these factors. And they come with a great deal of risk that other programs wouldn't. I was a big advocate for adding Texas A&M, a huge one, so much so that I was sought out by A&M fans. I called them a sleeping giant, I said they could be "scary" once they got things going. I believed in them absolutely, I talked about potential rivalries, Arkansas, LSU, etc... so I get a lot of your points, but Texas A&M has Arkansas, they have LSU, they have Alabama, they simply don't need Oklahoma. They don't, they might not even want them.

Now, we've seen South Carolina blossom within the SEC into a legitimate football program with good fans. We've seen Texas A&M step all the way up to #2 attendance in all of college football. But, it hasn't all been quite like that. Arkansas has been kind of stagnant within the SEC, and even Missouri, who is a good addition and has been winning games, hasn't seen much of a spike in attendance. There's no guarantee that you add a particular program, and things get better. The SEC has never added a football elite, not in my lifetime. The truth is that Oklahoma in their premier sport at least really has nowhere to go but down. That's a big risk, so much of their value is tied up in football, so much of LSU's current value is tied up in football, so much of A&M's value is tied up in football, so much of Alabama's value is tied up in football, this is kind of dangerous to mess with. What happens if you have an addition that's has more trouble adapting than Arkansas (who at one point was looking longingly at the Big 12?). There's some bad that could come of that relationship.
I dont think we can legitimately consider targeting members of another conference (the ACC) that has a fairly profitable network structure for itself as well. I think the network tie-ins are quickly making it difficult for teams to move.
The ACC buyout is very painful, but the numbers themselves for the ACC and Big 12 are about the same. Both conferences are weak. If the SEC Network gains enough traction, the financial incentive could be enough to lure away a program. It could in the foreseeable future be in the neighborhood of +10 million per year. That makes taking a hit to leave tolerable.

Now, I won't lie. I'm huge on North Carolina, I think Notre Dame, as has been said is the exception to all rules, you roll out the red carpet for them. Am I overjoyed at the prospect of Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina State, or Duke? No, I'm not. But, the SEC West just doesn't need Oklahoma, and it certainly doesn't need Oklahoma's little brother. They don't need to move past 14, but if they do there is an obvious choice and it's where the people are, on the east coast. There's no reason to assume the massive risk that moving into the small state of Oklahoma would entail, when there's much less risk and more reward elsewhere.
 
Last edited:

GrayTide

Hall of Fame
Nov 15, 2005
18,810
6,245
187
Greenbow, Alabama
KrAzY, I am a big fan of yours and certainly respect your contribution on here, but with all due respect Notre Dame is the midwest's version of Texas. They would, IMO, be a horrible fit in the SEC. I do however agree with your opinion on Oklahoma and that the SEC should look to the ACC for its next members.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
So the SEC pitched to A&M and Mizzou/VT before OU ? With all due respect I heard from the git go that the SEC wanted A&M and OU, even the A&M fans were saying that. I never heard Mizzou mentioned until after OU rejected the offer. Mizzou pursued the SEC vigorously only after it appeared that four Big XII teams were going to the PAC, effectively dissolving the Big XII. Mizzou had already been rejected by the B1G, in favor of Nebraska so Mizzou was not going to be left behind again. Smart move on their part. Doing much better than anyone had projected in the East, albeit the SEC east is down.
Maybe, but what officially came out was mizzou was a higher target for the sec. Mizzou brings the stl and kc markets which are more valuable than okc. I think it was better for the sec in the long run to get mizzou than ou.
 

BamaInBham

All-American
Feb 14, 2007
4,465
2,110
187
The following post is in a thread on RollBamaRoll. I'm especially interested in the comments regarding UNC since I, like some others here, have always wanted them for the reasons Krazy has articulated so well. Unfortunately, their attractiveness has diminished lately, though maybe only temporarily. Somehow they've also emitted an air of superiority. Still, after ND they appear to be the prize addition for the SEC and ND seems unlikely, unwieldly and unnatural. So, please comment. Is it true, etc. Thanks

One thing people forget:
Just after aTm was admitted into the SEC as team number 13, OU and T. Boone Pickens U. (OSU) both applied for admission into the Pac-10. (Utah and Colorado had not officially entered the conference at that time) However, they were denied because the existing members (led by USC) didn’t want to divide the pie further. In an alternate history, I wonder what would’ve happened had they applied to the SEC instead of the Pac-10…
(It’s established that Mike Slive dearly wanted UNC to be team #14, but would’ve had to have taken Duke, which would’ve been a deal-killer. I was personally hoping for Maryland, because it would’ve brought in the Baltimore and DC media markets, along with coverage from the prestigious Baltimore Sun and Washington Post.)
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.