Big 12 expansion?
- Thread starter WoadBlue
- Start date
Try not to be as stupid as the average WVU fan. The University of Virginia is Mr. Jefferson's university. It is unique in a way that is not even true of UNC. And Virginia Tech has spent its entire existence acting to try to become paired with UVA. That pairing is worth far more to VT than anything the SEC could dream of offering.
That is obvious to those who see whole pictures. Idiots of the football factor mentality will never grasp it.
UNC, Dook, and UVA are the tight 3some in the ACC. If the SEC wants us, it can boot at least one of the most revolting redneck schools it has and try to persuade the 3 of us. I would take that offer just to get shed of MooU and its WVU-level trashy and insane fans.
MooU would help move the SEC forward in bass fishing.
The SEC is already in Charlotte via the SEC network on Time Warner Cable and the Raycom affiliate (Charlotte actually carries the Raycom game of the week for both the ACC and SEC). Between those options, the 3:30 CBS SEC game, and the ESPN prime time games, I can't remember the last SEC football game that wasn't televised in the Charlotte market.
Not sure what coverage in RTP looks like. Anybody know? For the record, it makes my skin crawl when people refer to the area as Raleigh-Durham like it's one mega-city. Yes, I know that's the name of the airport, but ick.
UVA is a great academic school and a powerful institution in the ACC...but no where else. I'm sure it's all about the "big picture." Football and the TV money is way below anything else...oh that's right..it isn't. Actually recent events tell us it is THE MOST important thing. It's not about tradition and it sure as hell isn't about who was our 3rd President. South Carolina is a great example of what being in a great conference can do. Our facilities have improved 20 fold and the quality of all of our programs have risen. Texas never thought that Texas A&M would be the hot team in the state of Texas, but it is right now. Missouri is in the SEC purely because of the TV markets it brought. Charlotte is where the SEC Network is located so it would make sense for the SEC to pick up a team from NC. Again, I'd prefer Duke and UNC (not for football but brand and basketball). However, you guys are in a "tight alliance" with UVA who the SEC doesn't want...so that would reduce us to taking NC State and Va Tech (or some other team that would expand our footprint).
Go talk football factory stupidity to WVU fans and their ilk.
And please, beg the new SEC commish to go public with this Irresistible plan to lure VT away from UVA.
The SEC in playing the Big Ten's game of Pinky and the Brain needs to worry about that other insatiable monster: the BT. The BT knows it cannot bribe or seduce UNC and UVA, and that means all the recent buzz about the BT moving toward adding KU and OU is probably true. That move would give the BT the west side of Kansas City and the most successful football program in the nation post-WW2 and territory stretching to the Red River and TX. That move would neutralize Missouri as an SEC state and make the DFW TV market (which has roughly as many hardcore OU fans in it as A&M fans) at least halfway a BT market.
Instead of talking nonsense about the VT administration being stupid enough to spit and defecate on what it begged and fought to have since its founding, wise SEC fans interested in SEC expansion to 16 are now focused on how to add OU. Would OU require the SEC to take KU? KU would never fit in the SEC.
Would the SEC tell OU that if it wants a KS team it might consider Kansas State? KSU Wildcat fans are very much like Plains versions of most SEC fan bases. KSU in the SEC would forever demote KU football even if the BT added KU (with UConn or maybe Iowa St).
Would the SEC consider taking Oklahoma State in order to keep OU out of the BT? I doubt it, but it might be worth it.
Would the SEC agree to take Baylor or Texas Tech with OU, selling it to OU as doubling up the number of times SEC teams play in TX? Maybe. But my guess is that A&M would be adamantly opposed to TTU, which it sees as an inferior school piggybacking on the Aggies. A smaller private school like Baylor would be a lesser threat to A&M as a fellow TX school in the SEC.
UNC-UVA is the South's Oldest Rivalry. If SEC football fanatics were half as smart as they assume about their favorite subject, they would know that and keep it in mind in every discussion.
I do. UVA strong armed and made it happen. Something even happened in Virginia Legislature if I recall correctly. That was also a long time ago and the college football landscape has dramatically changed since then...
UGA vs Auburn was played the same year...starting in 1892...and is the Deep South's Oldest Rivalry...UNC vs UVA has been played 1 more time (119 to 118) however.
I'm very aware of the discussions presumably going on about Oklahoma. However, I don't think the SEC wants to take two teams from the West. I think they would like to take one on each side or two from the East side to balance the league out and get Missouri out of the "East" Division. It's all best guess anyhow. No one knows...except the big players and they're not talking to anyone on a "free message board" about it.
Then the SEC is stupid. It already has its 3rd farthest west campus (Missouri) in the East, making it seem geographically retarded. More important, it can't dislodge us or UVA, which means it can't dislodge Dook or VT or that pile of mangy dog feces in Rawlee. As much as I would love to never again play that collection of trash in any sport, I know that Moo would never let go its tentacles into UNC. Not as a school, not as an athletics department.
If you can't dislodge us and the BT is perhaps readying to move into DFW via OU fans, you are stupid to keep thinking about NC and/or VT.
Thus why it needs the adjective "Deep" in it to quantify it, and can't be called The South's Oldest Rivalry.
All good questions, but is the SEC really looking to expand again?....I'm just not convinced that the SEC will move to 16 teams, based on everything that I've read?
As for the B1G, it's just a matter of time IMO that both Oklahoma and Kansas are a part of the B1G because there just seems to be too much smoke coming out of Oklahoma for there not to be some type interest in getting out of the B12-4+2=10 conference....
Obviously if Oklahoma and Kansas leave the B12, it's hard for me personally to believe that the B12 would survive because Texas sure ain't going to sit still in a B12 without Oklahoma....
I'm somewhat hoping that both Oklahoma and Kansas leave because that would open the door for Texas to possibilly join the ACC in much the same fashion as Notre Dame did....
Recent comments by Missouri Coach Pinkel and Clemson's Dabo Swinney about Notre Dame needing to join a conference or play a 13 game schedule in order to qualify for the CFP, could be rectified in the short term with the addition of Texas to the ACC, and this is how it could work until such time that both Texas and Notre Dame join as full ACC members...
Both Texas and Notre Dame would play 6 games each against ACC competition, and then the weekend of the ACC Championship game, Texas and Notre Dame would play each other in a 13th regular season game.....The winner would then earn consideration for the CFP if they had an overall record worthy of them being included....
I know a lot of folk wouldn't want to give either of these teams that type of advantage, but I think this setup would help the ACC, especially if the CFP was expanded to 8 teams instead of the current 4-team CFP format....I would also like to see some type of arrangement where both Texas and Notre Dame would permanently join the ACC after a 5-year trial run as a partial member...
Just my 2 cents of what I would like to see happen!
^^^ be just fine with me, but I don't see the point of the conference allowing a five year trial run since they would need us more than we truly need them. If you disagree with that statement, I'd be willing to meet at 50/50 ... Both conference and school needing/wanting each other equally.
Would you really want those 2 huge egos to be permanent members of the ACC? ND will never give up the NBC TV contract as long as the network wants them and Texas will always be "Texas first" and I can't see the ACC giving them that advantage.
I also wonder about extra travel expenses for all sports teams of teams like Dook, Wake, Syracuse, BC, Pitt and anyone else with limited finances, or do you think they would be able to handle the additional costs?
The SEC would sacrifice children to get UNC and UVA. So, yes, the SEC will expand if it can get what it wants. The other school it wants, to further corral Texas., is OU. The SEC will take OU in a heart beat, and that goes double if the Big Ten is seriously interested in KU and OU. But KU? I can't see anybody with power in the SEC wanting KU.
Yes - those 2 super egos are extremely valuable. And on a lower level - the more Irish and Horns to hate, the less that ABC can rule the ACC.
ACC non-revenue teams now have to go to places as far apart as Boston and Miami, South Bend and Tallahassee, Syracuse and Clemson. How much added cost is going to Austin?
Woad, you and I seem to agree on the value of adding both Texas and Notre Dame as partial members, so let's weigh the Pros and Cons:
The Cons are obvious if you're not a Longhorn or Fighting Irish fan....They both are considered Prima-donnas, have their own TV Network or Contract, and just have fans who are smug, cocky and condesending for the most part, which puts a smile on my face when they lose...
The Pros are obvious too in both cases.....Notre Dame and Texas to a lesser degree have a National appeal and rich tradition....They also have folks like me on the other side that despise both programs, but still generally watch those teams when they play, and the games are televised....That means more eyes on the games....More games against ACC foes, means higher ratings, and more money and prestige for the conference as a whole....It is a good question whether to invite either program as full-fledged football members with the clout that both carry, so maybe a partial membership is the way to go for now?....The Strength of Schedule which is one of the more important things that the CFP committee considers when making their choices, would also be enhanced with a Non-Conference game with Texas....Texas is down right now, but does anyone with a brain think that's going to be longterm?....
The fledging Longhorn Network would work so much better for Texas if Texas became an Independent like Notre Dame, and 6 teams from the ACC each year would be broadcast for all those potential Texas High School recruits to see who had never even thought about playing for an ACC team before Texas joined as a partial member?....The games could be carried jointly by the LHN and the new ACC Network which would get the boost it needed from a partnershiip with both Texas and Notre Dame....The same week that the ACC and the other Power-5 Conferences play their respective championship games, would be the same week that Texas and Notre Dame would play to see if either team could qualify as a Wildcard for the new 8-Team College Football Playoff which is going to happen sooner rather than later...
Of course, all of this is just conjecture and wishfull thinking for now, but again, there's a lot of chatter from Oklahoma for me to believe there isn't something in the works....
I do agree that Kansas would never be a consideration by the SEC, but the B1G is another matter, and it has more to do with Academics...Kansas really doesn't bring anything as far as football goes, but they are a National brand for basketball, and have the prestigous Academic standing that the B1G core members have in order to be accepted, so that's why I grouped them with the Sooners who would rekindle their once great rivalry with Nebraska if they move to the B1G?
One way or the other, something is going to happen to the B12-4+2=10 Conference....Either they are going to expand with 2 or more teams, and play a conference championship game like the other P5 conferences, or they are going to have some members leave?....They like Notre Dame currently only play a 12 game schedule, while Conference Champions from the B1G,PAC,ACC and SEC play 13 games to qualify for the CFP....
One of those two things are going to happen in the B12-4+2=10 Conference, and it's just a matter of time!
I'll start at your bottom. I think the Big 12 is in major trouble. It may not happen even in 2016, but I think it is all but certain. So i think adding 2 will only stall the next set of defections. which will forever demote the Big 12.
If I am the BT, I would badly want OU for football, and KU with OU. The BT West is a nothing division. Make the OU-Nebraska game the BTW's marquee matchup, and it becomes a division worth watching.
If I am OU, I would prefer not to risk the BT. No way the BTW can ever be half as exciting as the SECW.
If I am the SEC, I would tell OU that it can choose from Baylor, TCU, and Texas Tech to enter the ACC. Doubling up in Texas cannot hurt. If OU says it needs to placate its state legislature, I would agree to take Oklahoma St. The reason is that OU, LSU, Arkansas, and Texas A&M in the SEC would mean that no matter what the Longhorns do, the largest number of college sports fans in TX will always be SEC fans.
If I am the Pac, and Texas is still a no-way, then I offer OU, Ok St, KU, and K-St. The Pac is dead last among P5s in total viewership for football and basketball. It desperately needs another brand name in each sport. OU and KU would deliver that. Both Ok St and K-St could be in the top half of the Pac in both sports most years - both could win Pac-East crowns.
If I am the ACC, I do very little, because Texas knows what is at stake. But if there is any ACC opposition to adding Texas as another 5/8ths football member, I would squash it.
