Link: Breaking: PAC 10 to invite 6 from Big 12
- Thread starter Bama323
- Start date
I hope the Pac 10 pulls this off as well. The MWC can add the remaining teams plus boise st and get an aq spot. I think the SEC adds Texas A&M.
I say the Pac 10 adds Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Colorado, and Kansas when Texas A&M turns the Pac 10 down for the SEC.
The Big 10 adds Nebraska, Missouri, Rutgers Pittsburgh, and Syracuse. I don't think Notre Dame will give in and join the Big 10.
The SEC adds Texas A&M, West Virginia, Florida State, and Clemson. I wish they could add Virginia Tech and North Carolina State, however, I think FSU and Clemson is more likely to accept an invitation.
The Big East will have four remaining teams and I think those four Cincinnati, South Florida, Connecticut, and Louisville will go to the ACC along with East Carolina and Central Florida to bring the ACC to 16 teams or the ACC could just take the four Big East teams and stay at 14 teams.
The Big 12 will have three Baylor, Iowa State, and Kansas State along with Boise State and Houston will go to the Mountain West Bringing them to 14 teams and an AQ Spot.
I say leave the SEC alone. Things are working just fine.
Truthfully I get nauseous, and I am serious, just reading all of your
this and thats. LEAVE THINGS AS THEY ARE!!!!!
:BigA::BigA::BigA::BigA::BigA:
Truthfully I get nauseous, and I am serious, just reading all of your
this and thats. LEAVE THINGS AS THEY ARE!!!!!
:BigA::BigA::BigA::BigA::BigA:
What makes aTm think the SEC is going to offer them a place? I haven't heard that we are in an expansion mode.
I'm with Lou here. Not going to happen.
Man! If Herb Winches was around he'd get to the bottom of this mess..:biggrin:
Until something actually happens, we're going to get a report similar to this every two weeks. It's going to be a loooooonnng summer.
Let's make one thing clear... the SEC was at a disadvantage for a while as one of only two conferences with a championship game and 12 teams. We routinely saw representatives from the Big East and ACC in the BCS championship game until they messed up their competitive balance and went to a 12 team conference. Once they got out of the way, it really cleared the road for the run the SEC went on.
The Pac-10 has been a player in that equation 3 times since though and the Big 10 has been in the mix as well. If viewed in isolation, the Big 10 adding Nebraska and the Pac-10 adding Texas and OU could really pave the way for the SEC to continue to shine. It remains to be seen if those teams could rise above the new schedule difficulty.
So, if the Pac-10 expands and the Big 10 expands? Good for them... hurray for us since it would further separate the real conferences from the pretenders and in this scenario that Big 12 (if they still exist at all) doesn't have a single contender left. Originally I was imagining a 12 team Pac-10 and Big 10 to go along with the Big-12, SEC and ACC. Now that might get blow up, but I'm still all for the Pac-10 and Big 10 making their schedules tougher. The only real concern I see if is the SEC overreacts, if they add Texas and OU, or Miami and FSU I think that in the long run it would do more harm than good. Reasonable additions and some balance (Texas A&M, Clemson, Louisville, FSU + basketball schools) could benefit the SEC in the same way that Arkansas and South Carolina benefited as additions.
If the Big 10 only adds Nebraska I see the Corn Shuckers being the dominate team in that conference in short order. Move aside Buckeyes.
At some point time Texas A&M needs to part ways with Big Brother Texas so they can stand on their own two feet(And yes you can say the same thing about our lil sister Barners)..And if Oklahoma or Nebraska comes as a package deal with Texas A&M..The Aggies would thrive in the SEC..Same goes for The Sooners & CornHuskers..JMO
Not that my opinion matters, but if we are going to expand for TV, then lets do it right and bring in a Texas, North Carolina, and Virginia teams.
I don't think A&M needs to move away from Texas but their situation is dramatically different from Auburn's. Auburn has been making a ton of money, but a lot of that has to do with Alabama and the SEC. Auburn is in a good spot financially and it's not like they can squeeze much more revenue out of a state with under 5 million people. Texas A&M has been making good money (about as much as Nebraska), but they have more incentive to break away. They're in a state with 24 million people and are clearly the second best program in the state. Programs like Michigan State, Oklahoma State and Stanford all make more than Texas A&M (but less than Auburn). So, it might be time Texas A&M makes a move solely for their own interests.
I see absolutely no need or point to bringing OU or Nebraska along. Nebraska makes the least sense geographically (north and west of any current SEC team or state, not adjacent to any SEC state) and OU is in a state with less than 4 million people and actually makes less money than OU State! So, considering that OU makes about as much as A&M, is in a dramatically smaller state and would be a greater threat to the SEC elites (such as Alabama), it's a big risk without huge reward. A&M, if they want in the SEC can have rivalries with LSU and Arkansas.
If you're just talking money, then obviously Texas has to be brought up again. But, as I've always said Texas is a massive headache. I'd prefer Notre Dame over Texas. In fact I'd prefer any of these teams over Texas: FSU, North Carolina, Duke, Clemson, Louisville, West Virginia, Virginia, Georgia Tech, Missouri and Oklahoma State. However, if you throw in Nebraska, Miami, Oklahoma and Texas then clearly Texas is the one to pick because of the revenue they generate.
I really agree with that basic idea, but then there's the whole tag-alongs thing.
For instance, can you add North Carolina without Duke and/or NC State? Can you add Virginia without Virginia Tech? Likewise, is Texas A&M able to be separated from Texas?
I don't think there is any question at all that if you add (for instance), FSU, Texas A&M, North Carolina and Virginia you have increased SEC revenue immediately and in the long term you've set them up for a massive TV deal (moved into states with 24, 9 and 7 million and expanded in a state with 18 million), without really messing up the competitive balance much (FSU is probably the most pain free "elite" add because they already play Florida every year) or making the SEC appear weaker in football. I've always liked the rivalry thing, I think it helps keep up interest even in off-years, but a aggressive expansion into new states could work as well for TV.
IF this is a true (A BIG IF with all the rumors that have been flying around lately.) Then this tells me that the Pac 10 knows something about USC's sanctions the rest of the world hasn't found out yet. They know the NCAA will give them more than just a slap on the wrist and are being proactive so that when USC does get a bowl ban, they'll have some other teams come to the forefront and the Pac 10 wont miss a step.
At least, that's what would make sense at this juncture in terms of how proactive they're being.
At least, that's what would make sense at this juncture in terms of how proactive they're being.
Last edited:
There is an article in the Tuscaloosa News this morning about the SEC presidents to discuss expansion. The reporter interviewed Mike Slive and while Slive did not come out and say this, he supposedly alluded to the fact that Texas might be playing the SEC against the PAC 10 in order to get them the best deal.
I am honestly not in favor of adding Texas period, maybe TAMU and Clemson or FSU and getting the SEC to 14 teams. A 14 team SEC still trumps a 16 team PAC 16 or Big 16 IMO.
I am honestly not in favor of adding Texas period, maybe TAMU and Clemson or FSU and getting the SEC to 14 teams. A 14 team SEC still trumps a 16 team PAC 16 or Big 16 IMO.
This plays into exactly why I do not want Texas in the SEC. They are not team players, their fans don't care about the conference really and you only add Texas if you're willing for them to be the center of the universe. Clearly Big 12 teams were unhappy and if the SEC bows to Texas it will be a mistake. I've said all along they won't fit...
I'd also agree that a 14 team SEC can work just fine.
Where did you get that okie state brings in more revenue than OU? According to Forbes in 2009, OU was 10th at 83.11 million and okie lite was 20th at 47 million. Big difference.
I'd like to see us go to 14 teams rather than 16. I think 14 teams would be perfect. Personally, I 'd like to see two teams picked from Ga. Tech, Clemson, Va Tech or Fla. State. Any two of these would make a good addition to the SEC.
You seem to be confusing Forbes calculated value of the football program with sports revenue. Forbes only calculates the value of the football program as they see it, at least in the article you are referring to.
This is a bit old but it's the best I've found so far, it is actual, reported revenue:
How much revenue did your favorite Football Bowl Subdivision school take in in 2007-08? This chart will tell you – College Gridiron 365 Blog – Orlando Sentinel
10th Oklahoma State $88,554,438 Big 12
17th Oklahoma $77,098,009 Big 12
Obviously this is not the only indicator, but it's a far better indicator than the Forbes football list because the SEC doesn't just compete in football.
Latest threads
-
ESPN: Florida CB Johnson faces 4 charges after arrest- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Ex-Utah QB Rising medically retires due to injury
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Miss. St. to build $60M indoor practice facility
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
-
ESPN: Austin Peay football player Hardrick dies at 22
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
Yahoo: Michigan football defense has hope that Alabama game dominance is just the beginning
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0