Jump to content

Division 1 College Conference Realignment


dfwabel

Recommended Posts

Florida State continues to deny rumors. Mizzou is interesting. The Big Ten screwed the pooch not swiping up Mizzou.

Debatable. The utter failure of the Big East's mid-2000s expansion demonstrates that pursuing markets at all costs doesn't always work.

Market. Footprint. Rivalries. Competition. Keeping them AWAY from the SEC.

Pooch = Screwed

We're in the St. Louis and Kansas City footprint already, and outside of Illinois they didn't have any rivalries of note. Regarding competition, Mizzou historically may be one of the few programs that does a better job of squandering the advantages given to them by geography and circumstance than Illinois, and you know what, I'm not seeing the Big Ten as in this life or death struggle with the SEC.

On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said:
You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now.
On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said:
Today, we are all otaku.

"The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert

POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010

The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from the money, I can't see any reason for A&M to join the SEC, as there is no way they'll be able to compete for the championship, unless Georgia, Florida, LSU, Alabama, Auburn & Tennessee all miraculously collapse in the same season, which ain't happening.

As for FSU going to SEC, please. Better luck saying that Miami is going.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mizzou historically may be one of the few programs that does a better job of squandering the advantages given to them by geography and circumstance than Illinois

To write out what I know about college sports could barely fill a postage stamp, but all I know Mizzou as is a team that is often involved in the wrong side of notable games. (The pro wrestling slang for this is "jobber to the stars.") I don't know that they squander what they have, though. Seems like they have a strong statewide fanbase to me.

If the squandering you refer to with Illinois is their failure to wholly capture Chicago, that's going to happen when you have a large population that goes every which way for school and lends its primary allegiances to professional football and basketball. I'd say they do well enough with a big downstate fanbase and a decent alumni foothold in Chicagoland. For that matter, Northwestern does about as well as they should for a school that doesn't emphasize athletics.

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What part of "the only thing that these conferences are interested in is money" don't you get? The only major media market Kansas has to offer is maybe Kansas City. Mizzou offers KC and StL. There's no point in adding either of those schools. Nebraska convinced the B1G they gave them the Kansas City market, and Illinois already gives them the St. Louis market. The Des Moines "market" is there with Iowa, and K-State has the same problems as Kansas. You don't grasp why they want to expand.

Nebraska is not the KC market. Kansas and Mizzou are. And Mizzou has a bigger piece of the St. Louis pie than Illinois. And besides, not everything comes down to what market they are. This isn't professional sports. Some of these schools are simply big money makers based on their own athletic teams. Kansas is one of the biggest basketball draws (as much as it pains me to say that), but football is not. They're not gonna go after them directly, but they'd be a decent "attachment school" if they went after Mizzou. Speaking of which, is becoming a steady football program that could become a Top 25 fixture. I still think, and would hope, that Mizzou winds up in the SEC if the Big XII does in fact dissolve.

The whole reason that Nebraska was admitted to the Big Ten instead of the Tigers last year was that the Huskers convinced the Big Ten that they had enough alums in Kansas City to cover the town and to get BTN into those households. If that's what the Big Ten wanted, then they got what they wanted, their product on in more households.

That's not what it was. Nebraska has alums all over the midwest, not just KC. They could've claimed any market over the other. It had nothing to do with simply the KC market as you seem to believe. Nebraska is a traditionally money making football college, plain and simple. Not because of a TV market 200 miles away in another state that's primarily a tv market for two other schools.

You're actually making your case sound worse than. What you're telling me is that Mizzou would have put BTN on in households in Kansas City, while Nebraska can put them on across the Dakotas, in Omaha, and in Kansas City? All the Big Ten cares about right now is getting their product into as many homes as possible, and the combination of Nebraska and Illinois has put it on across Missouri, no? You can't tell me that they wouldn't rather add the Baltimore/Washington, New York, and Boston markets as opposed to "strengthening" viewership in St. Louis and Kansas City. There's a lot more money to be made and a lot more households to get into from the east coast schools than Missouri. Now, I could understand if Missouri was a top athletic school, but stop pretending like it's on the level of prestige of a Nebraska, Ohio State, or Penn State. The whole state doesn't behave like those states do when it comes to caring about the university. Mizzou going to the SEC is a move that makes the most sense for everybody involved. The SEC accesses the KC and St. Louis markets they weren't already accessing (but the Big Ten was), and they can spread their product as well.

Aside from the money, I can't see any reason for A&M to join the SEC, as there is no way they'll be able to compete for the championship, unless Georgia, Florida, LSU, Alabama, Auburn & Tennessee all miraculously collapse in the same season, which ain't happening.

As for FSU going to SEC, please. Better luck saying that Miami is going.

The money is the reason for all of these changes. Anyways, what good is it for A&M to fall back into a weak conference? They've got a chance to go to the elite conference in college football, why wouldn't you make the move? You'll add revenue, and believe it or not, kids will get more excited about playing SEC ball than playing a schedule consisting of Kansas, K-State, and Iowa State every year. With Texas seemingly on the verge of going independent here and the rest of the Big XII probably going to bolt west, who knows?

6fQjS3M.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SEC has long been a proactive conference, and I generally don't question their methods because their decisions tend to work our far more often than not, but....

I'm not so sure what they're accomplishing by adding these particular four schools. No offense to Texas A&M, Missouri, Clemson, and Florida State.....but these are schools you expand with only as a reactionary case instead of persuing first, especially when you have bigger financial fish that can be (and most likely willingly wanting to be) caught, namely the two Oklahoma schools. I'll certainly give that FSU and Clemson are the most SEC-like schools in the ACC, and would probably be natural fits for the SEC.

The SEC has been rather silent the past couple weeks and especially silent in regards to expansion talk, so that does lead me to believe that something's going down. And Mike Slive does consider himself a "recovering lawyer", so you have to believe that he's got multiple plans up his sleeve.

The only reason I can think of that the SEC wouldn't be persuing Oklahoma and/or Oklahoma State is that the SEC is having backdoor, secret conversations with the Pac-12 and Big Ten conferences about expansion, and that they're making agreements about which schools they're going to persue for expansion.

Assuming the SEC does add these four schools, it's only a matter of time before the Pac-12 and Big Ten become 16-school conferences as well. The Big XII likely folds up shop, the ACC goes back to being an 8-10 school conference, and the Big East splits off into two conferences, with the newly-created conference being a basketball-only conference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I can say is if Mizzou goes to the SEC, southwest Missouri is going to erupt in college sports chaos. To date, since Arkansas and Mizzou don't really play each other, it just looks like two schools sharing one region. But there will be some serious dividing going on if they're playing every season as conference foes. At least they would have a hood rivalry to make up for the loss of the KU conference rivalry. Which, btw, will probably still be maintained as interconference. The football game wouldl take the place of the Muzzou-Illinois game which as ceased. And the basketball game would probably move to an annual thing at the Sprint Center in KC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from the money, I can't see any reason for A&M to join the SEC, as there is no way they'll be able to compete for the championship, unless Georgia, Florida, LSU, Alabama, Auburn & Tennessee all miraculously collapse in the same season, which ain't happening.

As for FSU going to SEC, please. Better luck saying that Miami is going.

Texas A&M is getting sick of "By God Texas". They see Texas getting a larger share of the Big XII pie, as well as having the Longhorn Network (buoyed by ESPN), and they want to emerge from the large shadow that Texas casts over them, and now it's hitting the boiling point.

Besides...it's not like Texas A&M was winning that many conference/national championships while they were members of the Big XII, anyway. It can't be any worse for them in the SEC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What part of "the only thing that these conferences are interested in is money" don't you get? The only major media market Kansas has to offer is maybe Kansas City. Mizzou offers KC and StL. There's no point in adding either of those schools. Nebraska convinced the B1G they gave them the Kansas City market, and Illinois already gives them the St. Louis market. The Des Moines "market" is there with Iowa, and K-State has the same problems as Kansas. You don't grasp why they want to expand.

Nebraska is not the KC market. Kansas and Mizzou are. And Mizzou has a bigger piece of the St. Louis pie than Illinois. And besides, not everything comes down to what market they are. This isn't professional sports. Some of these schools are simply big money makers based on their own athletic teams. Kansas is one of the biggest basketball draws (as much as it pains me to say that), but football is not. They're not gonna go after them directly, but they'd be a decent "attachment school" if they went after Mizzou. Speaking of which, is becoming a steady football program that could become a Top 25 fixture. I still think, and would hope, that Mizzou winds up in the SEC if the Big XII does in fact dissolve.

The whole reason that Nebraska was admitted to the Big Ten instead of the Tigers last year was that the Huskers convinced the Big Ten that they had enough alums in Kansas City to cover the town and to get BTN into those households. If that's what the Big Ten wanted, then they got what they wanted, their product on in more households.

That's not what it was. Nebraska has alums all over the midwest, not just KC. They could've claimed any market over the other. It had nothing to do with simply the KC market as you seem to believe. Nebraska is a traditionally money making football college, plain and simple. Not because of a TV market 200 miles away in another state that's primarily a tv market for two other schools.

You're actually making your case sound worse than. What you're telling me is that Mizzou would have put BTN on in households in Kansas City, while Nebraska can put them on across the Dakotas, in Omaha, and in Kansas City? All the Big Ten cares about right now is getting their product into as many homes as possible, and the combination of Nebraska and Illinois has put it on across Missouri, no? You can't tell me that they wouldn't rather add the Baltimore/Washington, New York, and Boston markets as opposed to "strengthening" viewership in St. Louis and Kansas City. There's a lot more money to be made and a lot more households to get into from the east coast schools than Missouri. Now, I could understand if Missouri was a top athletic school, but stop pretending like it's on the level of prestige of a Nebraska, Ohio State, or Penn State. The whole state doesn't behave like those states do when it comes to caring about the university. Mizzou going to the SEC is a move that makes the most sense for everybody involved. The SEC accesses the KC and St. Louis markets they weren't already accessing (but the Big Ten was), and they can spread their product as well.

Aside from the money, I can't see any reason for A&M to join the SEC, as there is no way they'll be able to compete for the championship, unless Georgia, Florida, LSU, Alabama, Auburn & Tennessee all miraculously collapse in the same season, which ain't happening.

As for FSU going to SEC, please. Better luck saying that Miami is going.

The money is the reason for all of these changes. Anyways, what good is it for A&M to fall back into a weak conference? They've got a chance to go to the elite conference in college football, why wouldn't you make the move? You'll add revenue, and believe it or not, kids will get more excited about playing SEC ball than playing a schedule consisting of Kansas, K-State, and Iowa State every year. With Texas seemingly on the verge of going independent here and the rest of the Big XII probably going to bolt west, who knows?

So you think A&M which prides itself on it's football, would want to move to a conference where they KNOW outright that they have absolutely NO shot at a league championship, let alone a national championship, unless 6 of the perennial college football powerhouses all magically have :censored:ty season the exact same year, rather then staying a conference where there is a good chance that Oklahoma/Texas will knock each other out of the national championship chase and A&M can maybe sneak into a BCS bowl game.

Even A&M can't possibly be that stupid, even of Rick Perry is a graduate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. A 16 team SEC is the domino that will change everything. Big Ten and PAC 12 will expand to match. Not sure who's going where (obviously), I wouldn't be surprised to see Texas, Oklahoma, or ok state in either conference.

I see big ten going Kansas (or Missouri if they aren't SEC or both) a big east school like Maryland or rutgers, Norte dame, and a Texas school (tech, Baylor for recruiting and markets). I think once all this happens they aren't going to care about the academics affiliations anymore. You see what the academic high ground did for the ivy league...

PAC 12 I think will nab Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma state and another big 12 school (tech, Baylor, k-state)

If that happens, football wise big ten is clearly the #3 conference. Them and the big east would be basketball powers though, which doesn't matter anyways...

All bets are off if Texas goes independent. PAC 12 may go 2 Texas schools 2 Oklahoma schools. ND stays independent and big ten might go bigger to the east.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doug Gotlieb reported a source confirmed aTm is joining SEC and that Mizzou, Clemson and Florida State likely to join. Breaking news on bottom line and I'm on my iPhone so I can't link but just check out espn.com.

Just got that text on my phone and was gonna jump on here and post it, looks like the first bomb is about to be dropped...

One cannot confirm a rumor and news when only one of the four schools has a meeting scheduled this weekend.

Clemson in the SEC? They have milked their title longer than any school ever and still has disappointing seasons. Get ready for more of the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from the money, I can't see any reason for A&M to join the SEC, as there is no way they'll be able to compete for the championship, unless Georgia, Florida, LSU, Alabama, Auburn & Tennessee all miraculously collapse in the same season, which ain't happening.

As for FSU going to SEC, please. Better luck saying that Miami is going.

Texas A&M is getting sick of "By God Texas". They see Texas getting a larger share of the Big XII pie, as well as having the Longhorn Network (buoyed by ESPN), and they want to emerge from the large shadow that Texas casts over them, and now it's hitting the boiling point.

Besides...it's not like Texas A&M was winning that many conference/national championships while they were members of the Big XII, anyway. It can't be any worse for them in the SEC.

Aggie has buyers remorse from the deal they reached last year to remain in the Big XII. They, Texas and OU are set to still have a larger share of the revenues than the other seven schools. They are scheduled to get $20M+ while the others will get $14-17M. Each was allowed to start a network then and now Texas actually did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LAND OF THE MEGA CONFERENCES

SEC

East

Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

West

Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

PAC-16

North

California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington, Washington State

South

Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, Utah

ACC

Atlantic

Boston College, Connecticut, Louisville, Maryland, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, West Virginia

Coastal

Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

BIG 16

Legends

Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Michigan, Michigan State, Nebraska, Notre Dame

Leaders

Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Wisconsin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SEC has long been a proactive conference, and I generally don't question their methods because their decisions tend to work our far more often than not, but....

I'm not so sure what they're accomplishing by adding these particular four schools. No offense to Texas A&M, Missouri, Clemson, and Florida State.....but these are schools you expand with only as a reactionary case instead of persuing first, especially when you have bigger financial fish that can be (and most likely willingly wanting to be) caught, namely the two Oklahoma schools. I'll certainly give that FSU and Clemson are the most SEC-like schools in the ACC, and would probably be natural fits for the SEC.

The SEC has been rather silent the past couple weeks and especially silent in regards to expansion talk, so that does lead me to believe that something's going down. And Mike Slive does consider himself a "recovering lawyer", so you have to believe that he's got multiple plans up his sleeve.

The only reason I can think of that the SEC wouldn't be persuing Oklahoma and/or Oklahoma State is that the SEC is having backdoor, secret conversations with the Pac-12 and Big Ten conferences about expansion, and that they're making agreements about which schools they're going to persue for expansion.

Assuming the SEC does add these four schools, it's only a matter of time before the Pac-12 and Big Ten become 16-school conferences as well. The Big XII likely folds up shop, the ACC goes back to being an 8-10 school conference, and the Big East splits off into two conferences, with the newly-created conference being a basketball-only conference.

At SEC Media Days, Slive did say, "I can get to 16 (teams) in 15 minutes."

Here is also an issue, only four teams can play in that prime CBS 3:30 slot and secondary ESPN/ESPN2 Saturday night slot. How many times a year will aTm, Clemson or any new team will actually play in those two slots?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SEC has long been a proactive conference, and I generally don't question their methods because their decisions tend to work our far more often than not, but....

I'm not so sure what they're accomplishing by adding these particular four schools. No offense to Texas A&M, Missouri, Clemson, and Florida State.....but these are schools you expand with only as a reactionary case instead of persuing first, especially when you have bigger financial fish that can be (and most likely willingly wanting to be) caught, namely the two Oklahoma schools. I'll certainly give that FSU and Clemson are the most SEC-like schools in the ACC, and would probably be natural fits for the SEC.

The SEC has been rather silent the past couple weeks and especially silent in regards to expansion talk, so that does lead me to believe that something's going down. And Mike Slive does consider himself a "recovering lawyer", so you have to believe that he's got multiple plans up his sleeve.

The only reason I can think of that the SEC wouldn't be persuing Oklahoma and/or Oklahoma State is that the SEC is having backdoor, secret conversations with the Pac-12 and Big Ten conferences about expansion, and that they're making agreements about which schools they're going to persue for expansion.

Assuming the SEC does add these four schools, it's only a matter of time before the Pac-12 and Big Ten become 16-school conferences as well. The Big XII likely folds up shop, the ACC goes back to being an 8-10 school conference, and the Big East splits off into two conferences, with the newly-created conference being a basketball-only conference.

At SEC Media Days, Slive did say, "I can get to 16 (teams) in 15 minutes."

Here is also an issue, only four teams can play in that prime CBS 3:30 slot and secondary ESPN/ESPN2 Saturday night slot. How many times a year will aTm, Clemson or any new team will actually play in those two slots?

I wonder if CBS will add a night game. FSU will see their share of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Florida State continues to deny rumors. Mizzou is interesting. The Big Ten screwed the pooch not swiping up Mizzou.

Debatable. The utter failure of the Big East's mid-2000s expansion demonstrates that pursuing markets at all costs doesn't always work.

Market. Footprint. Rivalries. Competition. Keeping them AWAY from the SEC.

Pooch = Screwed

We're in the St. Louis and Kansas City footprint already, and outside of Illinois they didn't have any rivalries of note. Regarding competition, Mizzou historically may be one of the few programs that does a better job of squandering the advantages given to them by geography and circumstance than Illinois, and you know what, I'm not seeing the Big Ten as in this life or death struggle with the SEC.

By market... I mean the Big Ten Network's market. The Big Ten gets roughly 70 cents on the dollar for every viewer inside a State that contains a school in the Conference. Every viewer in a State that does NOT contain a University in the Conference, the drops down to 30 cents on the dollar. I don't care if you are "in" the market or not... 70 > 30

Anyway... isn't this just what happened with the Big 10? Nebraska was officially invited, with "rumors" of Rutgers, Notre Dame, and Mizzou? Now the SEC has officially invited Texas A&M with rumors of Florida State, Mizzou, and Clemson?

What people are ignoring is the Texas effect. For a long time, I thought Texas and A&M were a package deal. You don't get one without the other. When the Big 10 was talking of expansion, they kept saying Texas, Texas, Texas. Everyone just brushed it off. Its really an interesting dynamic.

_CLEVELANDTHATILOVEIndians.jpg


SAINT IGNATIUS WILDCATS | CLEVELAND BROWNS | CLEVELAND CAVALIERS | CLEVELAND INDIANS | THE OHIO STATE BUCKEYES

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Texas isn't giving up the Longhorn Network and the Big 10 isn't taking Texas with the Longhorn network. The Big 10, SEC, and Pac-12 make all of their members schools turnover broadcast rights for all of their sports over to the conference to sell. That basically makes the TLN a no go for them. The Pac-12 might Texas as they in theory could fold the TLN into one of their regional channels they are launching. That still may require Texas to give up revenue from it. In that regard I see Texas trying to hold onto whatever is left of the Big 12. They would be more than happy if it transforms in the The Big Longhorn Conference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.