SEC reallignment - Moving Season?

[81usaf92]

Can't name many folks around here who care about TCU. More Baylol supporters.

(TCU is in Fort Worthless. Folks consider Dallas is where the East ends, and Ft. Worth where the West begins. The cultures are not alike, and neither cares for the other. So, no, not much TCU love around here.)

My point was there is little to no difference between getting OU and any of the Texas schools. Oklahoma brings nothing but a name in football to the table, which we already have an abundance of already. The whole point in expansion in 11 was to get the Texas and Missouri recruiting pipelines to the south, both of which Oklahoma and Nebraska depend on. So why would we go after a dry recruiting state when we could go into the east where we can get the North Carolina recruits. The going further into Texas isn't what I want but it is better than giving the deal of a lifetime to OU and OSU and getting nothing but a name and a tag along in return. Heck if we want a name Notre Dame is a name that brings way more to the table.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Will Auburn still be a team with fans at that point.

Maybe I should try to quote a prominent booger. " not playing the game to us was just plain dull and stupid"

Where has Alabama fans ever complained about the game other than how Auburn cheats the system?

Well, Joab Thomas was trying to back us out of it in 1987. He asked the SEC to make it a rotating game....at that time, our athletics department was in the red (er, crimson) and needed the money from the game and when the 1987 game kicked off, Tim Brandt talked about how it might be the last annual Iron Bowl.

Auburn, of course, cried fowl (if you'll pardon the pun).

 

[NoNC4Tubs]

Going back to the premise of the OP, the only way I could ever see us going to the east in the SEC is if we expanded to 16 teams and we brought in a couple of power teams like Texas and OU. I know it's not likely, but I'm just playing along. Texas could use the SEC in more ways than they can ever imagine and it probably wouldn't hurt them much from a financial situation because they SEC would just add more and more to it's equal payouts with the additions of two college football blue bloods.

Here's what it could look like:

EAST
BAMA
AUBURN
GEORGIA
TENN.
FLORIDA
VANDY
USCE
KY

WEST:
OLE MISS
MSU
LSU
TEXAS
OU
TEXAS A&M
ARKANSAS
MIZZU

We don't need Texas or OU. Besides, OU isn't going anywhere without OSU...:cool2:

 

[BamaMoon]

We don't need Texas or OU. Besides, OU isn't going anywhere without OSU...:cool2:

As I said, I was just playing along with the OP and stating that's the only way I could see us going to the east.

But, a super conference of 16 with that setup would be interesting to say the least. If we go to 16 teams I'd prefer to add blue bloods not not johnny come latelys.

 

[81usaf92]

As I said, I was just playing along with the OP and stating that's the only way I could see us going to the east.

But, a super conference of 16 with that setup would be interesting to say the least. If we go to 16 teams I'd prefer to add blue bloods not not johnny come latelys.

We could easily swap with vandy and mizzou and be almost geographically perfect in the east. The only reason it would never happen is that it gives LSU an easy road to the title game

 

[champions77]

My point was there is little to no difference between getting OU and any of the Texas schools. Oklahoma brings nothing but a name in football to the table, which we already have an abundance of already. The whole point in expansion in 11 was to get the Texas and Missouri recruiting pipelines to the south, both of which Oklahoma and Nebraska depend on. So why would we go after a dry recruiting state when we could go into the east where we can get the North Carolina recruits. The going further into Texas isn't what I want but it is better than giving the deal of a lifetime to OU and OSU and getting nothing but a name and a tag along in return. Heck if we want a name Notre Dame is a name that brings way more to the table.

Nothing but football? Just came off a Final Four in basketball, (5th Final Four), Women have been to three Final Fours in the last ten years, Softball won a NC in 2013, Baseball was in the CWS in 2010, Men's Tennis has finished second the last two years, and both Men's and Women's teams just won National Championships in Gymnastics last weekend. OU is far from being a "one trick pony" as you intimated. Probably be in the top 3 or 4 in the SEC with that kind of overall record.

Baylor and TCU as more profitable will be tested if and when the Big XII breaks apart. We'll see which conferences value which schools. I've seen the level of their support when both schools returned their ticket allotments the last time they played football in Norman.

 

[TideEngineer08]

Well when you look around the net it seems the direction we are headed is destined to be the dissolution of the Big 12 (or perhaps the ACC) and ending up with 4 conferences with anywhere from 16 to 20 teams a piece. The Big Ten is about to get a huge boost in revenue from new tv contracts which estimates say will net nearly 40 million per team before any profits from the Big Ten Network are factored in. The SEC is likely to receive the same whenever its contracts are renewed.

The Pac 12, ACC, and Big 12 lag way behind those numbers. The Pac 12 can't get its network off the ground, the ACC can't get one started at all, and the Big 12 doesn't seem to want one (except OU).

I suspect there is going to be a lot of movement in the next few years, driven by the Big Ten wanting to expand its reach ever further south. The SEC will respond in some way so as not to fall behind. The Big 12 or ACC is going to get raided. The PAC 12 is really on an island and unless they can get Texas, they're going to be in a sore spot. They won't lose any teams, but there really aren't any to add except Texas (and whoever else from the Big 12 such as Oklahoma). The ACC is in a vulnerable situation but not quite as bad as the Big 12, since they have their partnership with Notre Dame. But a 50 million dollar payout per year is going to entice any university. Even a North Carolina or Virginia.

 

[BamaMoon]

We could easily swap with vandy and mizzou and be almost geographically perfect in the east. The only reason it would never happen is that it gives LSU an easy road to the title game

Not following you. Vandy and Mizzu are already in the east. Do you mean either/or - Bama and one of them swapping?

Under current setup that would be a very bad trade for the east and like you said allow LSU to own the west as it would currently stand.

 

[81usaf92]

Nothing but football? Just came off a Final Four in basketball, (5th Final Four), Women have been to three Final Fours in the last ten years, Softball won a NC in 2013, Baseball was in the CWS in 2010, Men's Tennis has finished second the last two years, and both Men's and Women's teams just won National Championships in Gymnastics last weekend. OU is far from being a "one trick pony" as you intimated. Probably be in the top 3 or 4 in the SEC with that kind of overall record.

Baylor and TCU as more profitable will be tested if and when the Big XII breaks apart. We'll see which conferences value which schools. I've seen the level of their support when both schools returned their ticket allotments the last time they played football in Norman.

Missouri had similar success before joining, but where are they now? The move only benefits OU is the point.

 

[81usaf92]

Not following you. Vandy and Mizzu are already in the east. Do you mean either/or - Bama and one of them swapping?

Under current setup that would be a very bad trade for the east and like you said allow LSU to own the west as it would currently stand.

If you move vandy and mizzou to the west and bama and auburn to the east, then geographically we are pretty good. The problem is that LSU would take over the west. So it is making the East the super division and the west a one horse town.

 

[KrAzY3]

I think the SEC should be done with westward expansion. They entered the Big 12's two biggest states, there's no point to returning in my opinion. States like North Carolina and Virginia should be more appealing in my opinion.

 

[Crimson1967]

Nothing but football? Just came off a Final Four in basketball, (5th Final Four), Women have been to three Final Fours in the last ten years, Softball won a NC in 2013, Baseball was in the CWS in 2010, Men's Tennis has finished second the last two years, and both Men's and Women's teams just won National Championships in Gymnastics last weekend. OU is far from being a "one trick pony" as you intimated. Probably be in the top 3 or 4 in the SEC with that kind of overall record.

Baylor and TCU as more profitable will be tested if and when the Big XII breaks apart. We'll see which conferences value which schools. I've seen the level of their support when both schools returned their ticket allotments the last time they played football in Norman.

For overall athletics, the Sooners and little brother would be a better fit in the Big Ten as that conference is tops for wrestling. They also sponsor men's gymnastics. Only about 15 schools in the country have a men's team but about half the Big Ten does.

 

[champions77]

For overall athletics, the Sooners and little brother would be a better fit in the Big Ten as that conference is tops for wrestling. They also sponsor men's gymnastics. Only about 15 schools in the country have a men's team but about half the Big Ten does.

Really believe so? Norman is South of five SEC schools and Oklahoma borders three SEC states. Most here would identify "Southern" before they would "Midwestern".
Gosh have they even heard of fried okra, collard greens or chicken fried steak in Indiana or Minnesota? I doubt it.

 

[81usaf92]

Really believe so? Norman is South of five SEC schools and Oklahoma borders three SEC states. Most here would identify "Southern" before they would "Midwestern".
Gosh have they even heard of fried okra, collard greens or chicken fried steak in Indiana or Minnesota? I doubt it.

If you wanna go by that, well Missouri has BBQ and Branson. But you won't see many here consider them southern. Oklahoma is definitely Midwestern. Plus if Oklahoma was to move it would be better they did to Big 10 so atleast they could renew their rivalry with Nebraska, who is another reason that Oklahoma might wanna stay put.

 

[TideEngineer08]

Oklahoma can't go to the Big 10 without Texas, I'm convinced. The Big 10 offers no legitimate recruiting territory for OU. The states of Ohio, New Jersey, and Maryland do produce a fair amount of talent, but how often would they play in those states? And is there enough talent there for them to actually run a program on anyway? No. So they absolutely must have Texas as an annual game. If they could keep the game as a non-conference game, it might work.

They can make a new home in the SEC because they'd have Texas A&M as an annual opponent, plus the southeast would open up to them in recruiting.

They can make a new home in the PAC 12 because there is the state of California. The Big 10 is a big risk as far as recruiting goes, IMO.

 

[81usaf92]

Oklahoma can't go to the Big 10 without Texas, I'm convinced. The Big 10 offers no legitimate recruiting territory for OU. The states of Ohio, New Jersey, and Maryland do produce a fair amount of talent, but how often would they play in those states? And is there enough talent there for them to actually run a program on anyway? No. So they absolutely must have Texas as an annual game. If they could keep the game as a non-conference game, it might work.

They can make a new home in the SEC because they'd have Texas A&M as an annual opponent, plus the southeast would open up to them in recruiting.

They can make a new home in the PAC 12 because there is the state of California. The Big 10 is a big risk as far as recruiting goes, IMO.

Texas probably isn't in the equation of why they can't go there. The Big 10 has some standards that must met, but someone pointed out in another expansion thread that Oklahoma doesn't meet those standards. But if the possibility was there Oklahoma would do better for the pac 12 and big 10 than the sec. Their aTm and Mizzou rivalries aren't as lucrative as their rivalries with Texas and Nebraska. Plus making expansion rivalries in a new conference rarely works, i think the only exception might be LSU vs Arkansas but that's pushing it. I also think Oklahoma as a team would be like Nebraska in the Big10. They would lose a lot of their identity with having to deal with harder schedules. You can blame pelini all you want but playing a harder schedule doomed Nebraska just as much. So if Oklahoma becomes the same way, the merger only benefits them.

 

[champions77]

Oklahoma can't go to the Big 10 without Texas, I'm convinced. The Big 10 offers no legitimate recruiting territory for OU. The states of Ohio, New Jersey, and Maryland do produce a fair amount of talent, but how often would they play in those states? And is there enough talent there for them to actually run a program on anyway? No. So they absolutely must have Texas as an annual game. If they could keep the game as a non-conference game, it might work.

They can make a new home in the SEC because they'd have Texas A&M as an annual opponent, plus the southeast would open up to them in recruiting.

They can make a new home in the PAC 12 because there is the state of California. The Big 10 is a big risk as far as recruiting goes, IMO.

+1 Now I can agree with most of what you state. The only thing is with Norman being only 180 miles from Dallas (closer than UT is) that Texas will always be kind to OU in recruiting, with or without being together in the same conference or even playing each other. OU not being an AAU school would lost likely eliminate them for consideration of the B1G. As to the annual game in Dallas, I would imagine that A&M would love to play OU in Dallas every year. It would be another "gotcha" for A&M against Texas.
As far as Oklahoma not being southern, geographically, politically, culturally and climatically, Oklahoma is a much better fit in the South. Heck the last Confederate General to surrender was Stand Watie, who had adopted what is now Oklahoma as his home.

 

[crimsonaudio]

OU doesn't need ut any more than A&M does. OU will always get their share of players from Texas.

 

[TideEngineer08]

Texas probably isn't in the equation of why they can't go there. The Big 10 has some standards that must met, but someone pointed out in another expansion thread that Oklahoma doesn't meet those standards. But if the possibility was there Oklahoma would do better for the pac 12 and big 10 than the sec. Their aTm and Mizzou rivalries aren't as lucrative as their rivalries with Texas and Nebraska. Plus making expansion rivalries in a new conference rarely works, i think the only exception might be LSU vs Arkansas but that's pushing it. I also think Oklahoma as a team would be like Nebraska in the Big10. They would lose a lot of their identity with having to deal with harder schedules. You can blame pelini all you want but playing a harder schedule doomed Nebraska just as much. So if Oklahoma becomes the same way, the merger only benefits them.

I do not think lack of AAU status would hinder OU's entry to the Big Ten. They are a national brand. At this point, if the Big Ten finds that they cannot add anymore teams from southern ACC states such as North Carolina, Virginia, or even Georgia (Tech), then they are going to look at the Big 12. Notre Dame does not have AAU status. Does anyone think the Big Ten wouldn't allow them in? The same would go for OU. I know that Oklahoma isn't a massive media market, but they are a national brand, with a national following.

+1 Now I can agree with most of what you state. The only thing is with Norman being only 180 miles from Dallas (closer than UT is) that Texas will always be kind to OU in recruiting, with or without being together in the same conference or even playing each other. OU not being an AAU school would lost likely eliminate them for consideration of the B1G. As to the annual game in Dallas, I would imagine that A&M would love to play OU in Dallas every year. It would be another "gotcha" for A&M against Texas.
As far as Oklahoma not being southern, geographically, politically, culturally and climatically, Oklahoma is a much better fit in the South. Heck the last Confederate General to surrender was Stand Watie, who had adopted what is now Oklahoma as his home.

OU doesn't need ut any more than A&M does. OU will always get their share of players from Texas.

If Oklahoma doesn't need an annual presence in the state of Texas in order to maintain its recruiting status there, then they are golden. But I do wonder just how many of those Texas recruits are going to want to play in Minnesota and Wisconsin every year.

 

[KrAzY3]

OU doesn't need ut any more than A&M does. OU will always get their share of players from Texas.

Couldn't one say something similar about Nebraska? That they were such a powerful program they didn't need help of any sort? Yet, we've seen their program get slowly starved off.

I truly believe the programs best able to weather any variety of circumstances are the ones that do not rely on other states. When it comes down to it, when things get a bit tough, a program can turn to in-state recruiting and their fans within the state. If they are a small state that produces a limited amount of recruits? Things can go bad very fast. Texas A&M is from, well Texas... so all they ever had to do was just tap into their own state, that seems easier to me than for instance if Alabama had to rely on Louisianan for success.