Re: next round of expansion already getting underway
Remember, we heard some Maryland to SEC talk. It's purely a financial move, and if you consider the impact Texas A&M is having, you have to think there is some logic to adding teams for their market and not their prowess in football (although A&M seems to have both). Maryland clearly was thinking about leaving, and the Big 10 sees a way to move on from Notre Dame, without messing up the Big 10 powers that be. They might have also had a scare when Penn St. nearly has the death penalty, which would have resulted in a loss of their championship game. Maryland and Rutgers means more money, and less headache. However, if they had it to do over again I'm guessing they might have taken a harder look at Missouri.
I said before I do not believe the SEC should or will expand until the new contracts are inked. There's no incentive to do that, so even if the Big 10 makes this move, and there is a shift in power (the Big 12 is going to be keeping an eye on things, they don't want 12 teams, but they have to appreciate their vulnerability). The SEC has a couple of cautionary tales from the latest round of expansion. One is the scheduling difficulties, which will only increase with an addition. The other is Texas A&M. A&M was a fantastic addition, but it was almost too good. A&M could become a beast in the West and that's especially bad for programs like Ole Miss, Auburn, and Arkansas, which generally need some breaks anyway. The Missouri addition showed the path the Big 10 is choosing, which is that they only solidified the teams at the top rather than unseating them. Georgia and Florida got another easy game on the schedule.
So, I think the SEC should be very deliberate with their next move since it is likely their last. I've advocated for Virginia and North Carolina, largely because they (like the proposed Big 10 additions) would only help and not hurt. You move Vandy over to the West, and you haven't messed with things too much. But, that's 100 million in exit fees along with other things. It will take a lot for that to even be a possibility, so until then the SEC should get their new TV deal, and wait patiently.
The Big 10 had their eyes on Notre Dame the entire time. They didn't get Notre Dame, so they stopped at 12. The Notre Dame to ACC deal was really in Notre Dame's favor, no way the Big 10 or SEC would have catered to them that much. In turn, Notre Dame has propped up the ACC.So they didn't want Missouri but would take Rutgers or Maryland? Doesn't make any sense.
Remember, we heard some Maryland to SEC talk. It's purely a financial move, and if you consider the impact Texas A&M is having, you have to think there is some logic to adding teams for their market and not their prowess in football (although A&M seems to have both). Maryland clearly was thinking about leaving, and the Big 10 sees a way to move on from Notre Dame, without messing up the Big 10 powers that be. They might have also had a scare when Penn St. nearly has the death penalty, which would have resulted in a loss of their championship game. Maryland and Rutgers means more money, and less headache. However, if they had it to do over again I'm guessing they might have taken a harder look at Missouri.
It's going to be interesting to see how the ACC handles things. If Maryland does leave, it will show vulnerability within the ACC. The exit fee is massive, but FSU wanted out and most likely would have been out had the Big 12 not backed off (the Big 12 hates playing tough opponents).I think geographic balance and expanding our TV market footprint would almost have to mean that we take two schools from the states of North Carolina and/or Virginia eventually.
I said before I do not believe the SEC should or will expand until the new contracts are inked. There's no incentive to do that, so even if the Big 10 makes this move, and there is a shift in power (the Big 12 is going to be keeping an eye on things, they don't want 12 teams, but they have to appreciate their vulnerability). The SEC has a couple of cautionary tales from the latest round of expansion. One is the scheduling difficulties, which will only increase with an addition. The other is Texas A&M. A&M was a fantastic addition, but it was almost too good. A&M could become a beast in the West and that's especially bad for programs like Ole Miss, Auburn, and Arkansas, which generally need some breaks anyway. The Missouri addition showed the path the Big 10 is choosing, which is that they only solidified the teams at the top rather than unseating them. Georgia and Florida got another easy game on the schedule.
So, I think the SEC should be very deliberate with their next move since it is likely their last. I've advocated for Virginia and North Carolina, largely because they (like the proposed Big 10 additions) would only help and not hurt. You move Vandy over to the West, and you haven't messed with things too much. But, that's 100 million in exit fees along with other things. It will take a lot for that to even be a possibility, so until then the SEC should get their new TV deal, and wait patiently.
Really? The Alabama vs. Texas A&M match-up was the second highest rated game of the season. It only trailed Alabama vs. LSU. For starters, I'm not inclined to be upset about Alabama being in the two top rated games this season, and secondly without A&M in the conference I'm guessing this wouldn't have happened.I'm sick of expansion. This last expansion has done us no good.