Kirby Smart: SEC may secede from NCAA

[JDCrimson]

Sorry, but I don't see how you could realistically get those kind of numbers numbers...

Maybe not, but it is probably worth a desktop exercise from a strategic standpoint. Its pretty obvious that ESPN wants to compete with the Big10-Fox networks.

I think its worthwhile to consider. 32 teams seems to be the right amount of teams for scheduling, post-season, revenue maximization. The SEC have the advantage if they made such a move in that all their conference teams would be within 1 time zone of each other, still have the weather advantage, provide better competition among the bottom half of the conference such MSU, Arkansas matchup better with Duke, GaTech, UNC, Baylor, etc.

 

[dtgreg]

Maybe not, but it is probably worth a desktop exercise from a strategic standpoint. Its pretty obvious that ESPN wants to compete with the Big10-Fox networks.

I think its worthwhile to consider. 32 teams seems to be the right amount of teams for scheduling, post-season, revenue maximization. The SEC have the advantage if they made such a move in that all their conference teams would be within 1 time zone of each other, still have the weather advantage, provide better competition among the bottom half of the conference such MSU, Arkansas matchup better with Duke, GaTech, UNC, Baylor, etc.

Maybe not, but it is probably worth a desktop exercise from a strategic standpoint. Its pretty obvious that ESPN wants to compete with the Big10-Fox networks.

I think its worthwhile to consider. 32 teams seems to be the right amount of teams for scheduling, post-season, revenue maximization. The SEC have the advantage if they made such a move in that all their conference teams would be within 1 time zone of each other, still have the weather advantage, provide better competition among the bottom half of the conference such MSU, Arkansas matchup better with Duke, GaTech, UNC, Baylor, etc.

I would never, even ten years ago, believed all the evil and crazy that could rear its ugly head. I know for a fact now that bad actors never truly die, they at best just go underground.

I believe the Big 10/ Pac 12, which is just the B1G now, want to bury Southern football and emerge as the only "Big League" College football entity. They tried to do it decades ago when they made the Rose Bowl a closed shop and refused to add Notre Dame. I believe they would love nothing more than for the SEC to leave first and especially, while the Southern States are passing anti-black voting laws and gerrymanders. They have more money than we do and if they can get the black athletes, or at least the best, we will be relegated to second-class status as a league.

They have secured a national TV footprint and could add their pick of ACC schools and anyone else. We had better tread wisely.

 

[mdb-tpet]

I would never, even ten years ago, believed all the evil and crazy that could rear its ugly head. I know for a fact now that bad actors never truly die, they at best just go underground.

I believe the Big 10/ Pac 12, which is just the B1G now, want to bury Southern football and emerge as the only "Big League" College football entity. They tried to do it decades ago when they made the Rose Bowl a closed shop and refused to add Notre Dame. I believe they would love nothing more than for the SEC to leave first and especially, while the Southern States are passing anti-black voting laws and gerrymanders. They have more money than we do and if they can get the black athletes, or at least the best, we will be relegated to second-class status as a league.

They have secured a national TV footprint and could add their pick of ACC schools and anyone else. We had better tread wisely.

You said a lot of the quiet parts out loud here (which will put this in the politics forum quickly). There will always be a northern vs. southern dynamic and the us vs. them issues that come with that dynamic which creates all kinds of ugly false cultural/political boundaries.

The only real solution is to truly work together to make a better football product and have some adults/atheletes work to make a more equitable system that is far less driven by cash and greed. I don't know who besides maybe a leader like Nick Saban with a massive help from the conference commissioners/NCAA/Congress has the true gravitas to do that. We're not being lead by honest adults looking for the best solution for all right now, so I don't see much a chance for things to get better anytime soon.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

Wow. Pretty strong comments if ya ask me. Though personally I'm not sure if the SEC honestly is a strong enough national brand of a conference to be able to go it alone without the NCAA. But good for discussing

With expansion argument brewing, Smart hints at SEC secession

Conversations around conference expansion have dominated the college football spring meetings thus far, and Kirby Smart's comments on Tuesday about the SEC essentially seceding if an agreement can't be reached have created plenty of questions.

www.espn.com

The SEC (by itself) isn't strong enough to do this by itself. It would need other teams/conferences to follow them.

 

[tusks_n_raider]

The SEC (by itself) isn't strong enough to do this by itself. It would need other teams/conferences to follow them.

I agree.

The SEC had the height of its power and leverage from 2008-2022 or thereabouts.

They maybe could have broken away on their own before and survived but not in the current landscape.

Interest is down regionally and nationally too.

SEC HCs need to quit whining and crying about everything and figure out how to navigate NIL and the Portal and stay competitive.

They are all being paid Millions of dollars to do that.

 

[Power Eye]

You said a lot of the quiet parts out loud here (which will put this in the politics forum quickly). There will always be a northern vs. southern dynamic and the us vs. them issues that come with that dynamic which creates all kinds of ugly false cultural/political boundaries.

The only real solution is to truly work together to make a better football product and have some adults/atheletes work to make a more equitable system that is far less driven by cash and greed. I don't know who besides maybe a leader like Nick Saban with a massive help from the conference commissioners/NCAA/Congress has the true gravitas to do that. We're not being lead by honest adults looking for the best solution for all right now, so I don't see much a chance for things to get better anytime soon

I will keep this within the politics of college football, but it is frustrating that even in something that should be a distraction from all the other nonsense in the world, college football is not immune to the ridiculousness of divisive politics. I used to at least have a muted interest in Joel Klatt's opinion on things, but it is to the point that I can't listen any further to him. He's purely a mouth piece for the Big 10's own self interest. It's actually an insult to everyone's intelligence the way he tries to come across as unbiased. Just own it, I would respect that way more than how he currently goes about it. There are other's associated with Fox as well that are the same way, but they aren't even worth mentioning since they don't have the platform as Klatt. I could be biased myself, but there doesn't seem to be a media personality that stumps for the SEC like Klatt does for the Big 10. Even Finebaum is equal parts SEC homer and villain.

With that said, there is no ability for the SEC to break-off and become its own entity. The lure and value of the SEC is its success within college football as a whole. Without one, you can't have the other. Yes, the Big 10 has had the upper hand the last few years, and that is frustrating to SEC fans, but it's also what creates the competitive balance and an overall national interest.

Your point about working together for the sake of the sport is valid because that's ultimately how each conference will thrive. It's just frustrating to spend another offseason watching and listening to them go back and forth with one another while nothing gets resolved in terms of making the sport really great. A huge opportunity exists to get NIL/pay-for-play, the transfer portal, playoff selection, and the college football calendar correct, if the SEC and Big 10 would come together, but instead they each just focus on their own short term wants. I believe the Big 12 and ACC have accepted their fates as bystanders in all of this, yet the SEC and Big 10 just continue this manhood measuring contest that is just nonsensical. I will never understand how individuals in a position of leadership as Sankey, Petitti, etc., who I know are intelligent people and are forward thinkers can't see what the rest of us sees. The sport, and the conferences, are going to die if there aren't major changes.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

I agree.

The SEC had the height of its power and leverage from 2008-2022 or thereabouts.

They maybe could have broken away on their own before and survived but not in the current landscape.

Interest is down regionally and nationally too.

SEC HCs need to quit whining and crying about everything and figure out how to navigate NIL and the Portal and stay competitive.

They are all being paid Millions of dollars to do that.

The irony in all of this is there is one party being paid millions to coach, frustrated because now they have to pay another party millions to play. Millionaires getting mad at other millionaires. LOL!

 

[KrAzY3]

I believe the Big 10/ Pac 12, which is just the B1G now, want to bury Southern football and emerge as the only "Big League" College football entity. They tried to do it decades ago when they made the Rose Bowl a closed shop and refused to add Notre Dame. I believe they would love nothing more than for the SEC to leave first

I think the path to power goes through the south, but it is the Big 10, not the SEC that can do more with that.

The SEC just doesn't have enough good targets left to make a geographical power grab, they'd rapidly see a reduction in per school payouts if they were try to do that. For instance, after the very logical choice of Virginia and North Carolina, you'd end up with something like Pitt, Cincinnati (Big 12), Boston College and Syracuse. These are middle of the pack ACC schools, a conference which pays out about half what the SEC does.

On the other hand, the Big 10 could go after Virginia and North Carolina as well, but then chart a path toward more lucrative territory, for instance Clemson, Louisville, Georgia Tech, and Florida State. These trend towards the top of the ACC in earnings, and not only that but it's a far more direct threat to the SEC's regional dominance.

Furthermore, since they're already established on the west coast, they could realistically do something like go after something like Arizona and Texas Tech as well. The SEC is already in Florida and Texas for example, the Big 10 simply has more territory they could turn into "battlegrounds" than the SEC can. This means if things heat up between the two, the SEC likely has to adopt a more defensive posture (doubling down on territory they already control) while the Big 10 can adopt an offensive posture (moving into new territory).

Having said that, it's not something I see either party as wanting to do because they'd have to share TV revenue with the new schools. So yes, it is basically waiting for the other side to screw up and then take advantage. Or, of course figure out how to cooperate and sort things out.

 

[davefrat]

I think the path to power goes through the south, but it is the Big 10, not the SEC that can do more with that.

The SEC just doesn't have enough good targets left to make a geographical power grab, they'd rapidly see a reduction in per school payouts if they were try to do that. For instance, after the very logical choice of Virginia and North Carolina, you'd end up with something like Pitt, Cincinnati (Big 12), Boston College and Syracuse. These are middle of the pack ACC schools, a conference which pays out about half what the SEC does.

On the other hand, the Big 10 could go after Virginia and North Carolina as well, but then chart a path toward more lucrative territory, for instance Clemson, Louisville, Georgia Tech, and Florida State. These trend towards the top of the ACC in earnings, and not only that but it's a far more direct threat to the SEC's regional dominance.

Furthermore, since they're already established on the west coast, they could realistically do something like go after something like Arizona and Texas Tech as well. The SEC is already in Florida and Texas for example, the Big 10 simply has more territory they could turn into "battlegrounds" than the SEC can. This means if things heat up between the two, the SEC likely has to adopt a more defensive posture (doubling down on territory they already control) while the Big 10 can adopt an offensive posture (moving into new territory).

Having said that, it's not something I see either party as wanting to do because they'd have to share TV revenue with the new schools. So yes, it is basically waiting for the other side to screw up and then take advantage. Or, of course figure out how to cooperate and sort things out.

I don't think UVA would join the SEC. They don't need money (their alumni are incredibly wealthy) and they are far more focused on academics than athletics anyways. If you spend any time on their campus (my brother went there as did one of my kids) and it's far more like being on a Ivy League campus than a big rah-rah sports school.

I think the university and the majority of their alums would consider joining the SEC as moving from the penthouse to the outhouse.

UVA would be a much better fit for the BIG than the SEC imo.

 

[KrAzY3]

I don't think UVA would join the SEC. They don't need money (their alumni are incredibly wealthy) and they are far more focused on academics than athletics anyways. If you spend any time on their campus (my brother went there as did one of my kids) and it's far more like being on a Ivy League campus than a big rah-rah sports school.

I think the university and the majority of their alums would consider joining the SEC as moving from the penthouse to the outhouse.

UVA would be a much better fit for the BIG than the SEC imo.

I think that's fairly accurate and I was mainly trying to chart the most optimistic course for the SEC's expansion. While not as much of a long-shot as Notre Dame, Virginia is not an easy addition (most likely scenario is if the ACC fails and the Big 10 does not extend an invite) so yes that plan likely fails before it gets started.

I think you also outlined why they are a good addition target though, they and their athletic department are in good shape, they don't need cash infusions, private equity, or the sort of desperation we see coming from some other programs. Their athletic department makes about 10% more than Virginia Tech's department does for instance.

So, if the Big 10 wants to expand and move towards the south, they do have a fairly easy target. That's why the SEC likely gets pushed into a defensive posture either way, and why I've settled on UNC and FSU as likely top targets for the SEC. If UNC doesn't want to join then the SEC becomes pretty exposed to Big 10 expansion (for instance Virginia, UNC, Georgia Tech and Miami, all members of AAU I believe).

 

[TideEngineer08]

If UNC doesn't want to join then the SEC becomes pretty exposed to Big 10 expansion (for instance Virginia, UNC, Georgia Tech and Miami, all members of AAU I believe).

They are and the Big Ten will absolutely pursue them in the next round, and each of those schools will join the Big Ten over the SEC because the people who run those schools have nothing but disdain for the SEC and the south in general and consider the Big Ten morally superior.

The SEC has exhausted its reasonable options at this point with its additions of Texas and Oklahoma. If it expands again, it will be to take the scraps left after the Big Ten consumes what it wants. There was a time when dynamic leadership would have made moves to cut the Big Ten off, but Sankey is no such leader.

 

[Slowpoke Catracho]

The irony in all of this is there is one party being paid millions coach, frustrated because now they have to pay another party millions to play. Millionaires getting mad at other millionaires. LOL!

And the "Regular Fans and Alumni" are the ones left singing the blues.

 

[NoNC4Tubs]

The best move that could be made right now is to replace Sankey with a better commissioner...

Caving in to a nine-game conference schedule exposed how weak he is as a commissioner.

 

[JDCrimson]

I think the path to power goes through the south, but it is the Big 10, not the SEC that can do more with that.

The SEC just doesn't have enough good targets left to make a geographical power grab, they'd rapidly see a reduction in per school payouts if they were try to do that. For instance, after the very logical choice of Virginia and North Carolina, you'd end up with something like Pitt, Cincinnati (Big 12), Boston College and Syracuse. These are middle of the pack ACC schools, a conference which pays out about half what the SEC does.

On the other hand, the Big 10 could go after Virginia and North Carolina as well, but then chart a path toward more lucrative territory, for instance Clemson, Louisville, Georgia Tech, and Florida State. These trend towards the top of the ACC in earnings, and not only that but it's a far more direct threat to the SEC's regional dominance.

Furthermore, since they're already established on the west coast, they could realistically do something like go after something like Arizona and Texas Tech as well. The SEC is already in Florida and Texas for example, the Big 10 simply has more territory they could turn into "battlegrounds" than the SEC can. This means if things heat up between the two, the SEC likely has to adopt a more defensive posture (doubling down on territory they already control) while the Big 10 can adopt an offensive posture (moving into new territory).

Having said that, it's not something I see either party as wanting to do because they'd have to share TV revenue with the new schools. So yes, it is basically waiting for the other side to screw up and then take advantage. Or, of course figure out how to cooperate and sort things out.

We won't have to wait too long for Sankey to screw up...

A good defense is a good offense. The SEC may need to consider a pay cut to build a fortress around its geography and revenue base. Sure the Big10 can expand but its in places where the fan demand is much more tepid. They cant grow value in baseball or softball. They may not be able to grow value in basketball. Plus the Big10's academic snobbery would limit who they target.

To me if the SEC can expand but improve the revenue position of the bottom half of the conference it improves the whole conference. All the regional rivalries would be more valuable if they had conference implications.

People from the Midwest just arent going to care about southern football teams in the Big10. Indiana fans are to arrogantly dismiss Clemson much more than we would if they were members of the SEC.

I will put money behind passion before I put money behind potential. If people are not watching, they are of no value.

 

[TideEngineer08]

We won't have to wait too long for Sankey to screw up...

A good defense is a good offense. The SEC may need to consider a pay cut to build a fortress around its geography and revenue base. Sure the Big10 can expand but its in places where the fan demand is much more tepid. They cant grow value in baseball or softball. They may not be able to grow value in basketball. Plus the Big10's academic snobbery would limit who they target.

To me if the SEC can expand but improve the revenue position of the bottom half of the conference it improves the whole conference. All the regional rivalries would be more valuable if they had conference implications.

People from the Midwest just arent going to care about southern football teams in the Big10. Indiana fans are to arrogantly dismiss Clemson much more than we would if they were members of the SEC.

I will put money behind passion before I put money behind potential. If people are not watching, they are of no value.

I think Sankey wrongly guessed the Big Ten would never expand west. But in taking Texas/OU, it triggered desperation from the Big Ten. Sure the ACC had the grant of rights contract which made things messy.

Sankey repeatedly stated he didn’t want to “destroy another league.” But that was sanctimonious. Taking Texas/OU basically did leave the Big 12 on life support. The Big Ten was willing to be honest about it and kill off the PAC 12.

Hindsight is beneficial but I think Sankey should have gone all in and taken FSU, Clemson, UNC, and Virginia. By taking those teams, you’ve effectively killed the ACC, blocked the Big Ten from making meaningful expansion southward, and maybe opened yourself up to other possibilities such as Notre Dame (who would have lost its ACC half marriage).

There was a window of time where this was possible. That window is now shut. Sankey has since been outplayed in tv deals and the 9 game conference schedule. The SEC falls farther behind in NIL. The Big Ten took the gloves off a few years ago. The SEC has been flat footed and stumbling backwards ever since.