My latest take on the expansion talks...

[JessN]

I'd rather not add anyone. The problem, though, is that we know Colorado is going to the PAC-10 and Nebraska is all but gone to the Big Ten, which makes the Big 12 basically unsalvageable. The Big 12 would have to add some combination of Utah-BYU-TCU to replace those two programs just to keep the championship game. Given how shaky the Big 12 conference is in the first place, I think the big schools are looking for an excuse to leave.

Once that happens, the PAC-10 is going to snap up at least Oklahoma State and Texas Tech, which leaves Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma essentially holding a bidding war. The SEC can't afford to let all three of those schools go to the PAC-10 unless they can then in turn add North Carolina and Virginia at the very least, and probably Virginia Tech and someone out of the Miami-NC State-Maryland-West Virginia-Missouri basket, although none of those (other than perhaps Missouri) really excite me.

I think it's clear right now that Texas is fishing for a deal. They seem to prefer the PAC-10 but would take the Big Ten or the SEC if and only if one of those conferences spit-shines their boots, and I doubt the SEC is going to bow to that. All it takes are four "no" votes and I just don't see Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Florida or Tennessee bowing to Texas, particularly when you can get A&M with less fuss and access the same television market.

Where the SEC is over a barrel is if they lose the "Big 12 Six" to the PAC-10, and then can't convince North Carolina to join up. Then you're left with inviting Missouri and Virginia/Virginia Tech to join up, and although that gives you the D.C/Baltimore and St. Louis TV markets, it's not a splash on the level of landing some of the top Big 12 schools (Missouri doesn't qualify as such, sorry Mizzou). Because we don't gain anything by inviting Georgia Tech, Clemson or NC State, and it's questionable how much would be gained by inviting Florida State, Miami, West Virginia or Louisville. Maryland has potential but really, they don't fit the SEC mindset.

And on a side note, I really can't understand what's taking the Big Ten so long to invite Missouri.

My prediction as of 11:40 p.m. 6-10-10: SEC gets Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma and probably Virginia Tech. I would prefer North Carolina came rather than Missouri but they're not asking me.

 

[bmcklv]

I'd prefer to keep it at 12, but it probably won't happen. If the Pac-16 happens the way I've seen/read it (Texas, TAMU, TTU, OU, OkSt, and Colorado), I've read that it'll bring each schools TV revenue up to the same level the SEC already enjoys.

 

[silentsam74]

My prediction as of 11:40 p.m. 6-10-10: SEC gets Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma and probably Virginia Tech. I would prefer North Carolina came rather than Missouri but they're not asking me.

One of the Austin American-Statesman columnists wrote a small article in which he stated that Mike Slive's dream list is Texas, Texas A&M, UNC, and Duke.

Click

*EDIT Of course, I can't see them going there without some sort of divisional realignment. The SEC West would be an absolute meat grinder.

 

[BamaBackerBill]

I'd rather not add anyone. The problem, though, is that we know Colorado is going to the PAC-10 and Nebraska is all but gone to the Big Ten, which makes the Big 12 basically unsalvageable. The Big 12 would have to add some combination of Utah-BYU-TCU to replace those two programs just to keep the championship game. Given how shaky the Big 12 conference is in the first place, I think the big schools are looking for an excuse to leave.

Once that happens, the PAC-10 is going to snap up at least Oklahoma State and Texas Tech, which leaves Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma essentially holding a bidding war. The SEC can't afford to let all three of those schools go to the PAC-10 unless they can then in turn add North Carolina and Virginia at the very least, and probably Virginia Tech and someone out of the Miami-NC State-Maryland-West Virginia-Missouri basket, although none of those (other than perhaps Missouri) really excite me.

I think it's clear right now that Texas is fishing for a deal. They seem to prefer the PAC-10 but would take the Big Ten or the SEC if and only if one of those conferences spit-shines their boots, and I doubt the SEC is going to bow to that. All it takes are four "no" votes and I just don't see Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Florida or Tennessee bowing to Texas, particularly when you can get A&M with less fuss and access the same television market.

Where the SEC is over a barrel is if they lose the "Big 12 Six" to the PAC-10, and then can't convince North Carolina to join up. Then you're left with inviting Missouri and Virginia/Virginia Tech to join up, and although that gives you the D.C/Baltimore and St. Louis TV markets, it's not a splash on the level of landing some of the top Big 12 schools (Missouri doesn't qualify as such, sorry Mizzou). Because we don't gain anything by inviting Georgia Tech, Clemson or NC State, and it's questionable how much would be gained by inviting Florida State, Miami, West Virginia or Louisville. Maryland has potential but really, they don't fit the SEC mindset.

And on a side note, I really can't understand what's taking the Big Ten so long to invite Missouri.

My prediction as of 11:40 p.m. 6-10-10: SEC gets Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma and probably Virginia Tech. I would prefer North Carolina came rather than Missouri but they're not asking me.

Jess,

I agree totally with you, but could UNC be lured without Duke?

 

[RJ YellowHammer]

I'd rather not add anyone. The problem, though, is that we know Colorado is going to the PAC-10 and Nebraska is all but gone to the Big Ten, which makes the Big 12 basically unsalvageable. The Big 12 would have to add some combination of Utah-BYU-TCU to replace those two programs just to keep the championship game. Given how shaky the Big 12 conference is in the first place, I think the big schools are looking for an excuse to leave.

Once that happens, the PAC-10 is going to snap up at least Oklahoma State and Texas Tech, which leaves Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma essentially holding a bidding war. The SEC can't afford to let all three of those schools go to the PAC-10 unless they can then in turn add North Carolina and Virginia at the very least, and probably Virginia Tech and someone out of the Miami-NC State-Maryland-West Virginia-Missouri basket, although none of those (other than perhaps Missouri) really excite me.

I think it's clear right now that Texas is fishing for a deal. They seem to prefer the PAC-10 but would take the Big Ten or the SEC if and only if one of those conferences spit-shines their boots, and I doubt the SEC is going to bow to that. All it takes are four "no" votes and I just don't see Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Florida or Tennessee bowing to Texas, particularly when you can get A&M with less fuss and access the same television market.

Where the SEC is over a barrel is if they lose the "Big 12 Six" to the PAC-10, and then can't convince North Carolina to join up. Then you're left with inviting Missouri and Virginia/Virginia Tech to join up, and although that gives you the D.C/Baltimore and St. Louis TV markets, it's not a splash on the level of landing some of the top Big 12 schools (Missouri doesn't qualify as such, sorry Mizzou). Because we don't gain anything by inviting Georgia Tech, Clemson or NC State, and it's questionable how much would be gained by inviting Florida State, Miami, West Virginia or Louisville. Maryland has potential but really, they don't fit the SEC mindset.

And on a side note, I really can't understand what's taking the Big Ten so long to invite Missouri.

My prediction as of 11:40 p.m. 6-10-10: SEC gets Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma and probably Virginia Tech. I would prefer North Carolina came rather than Missouri but they're not asking me.

I hope you're right!

 

[silentsam74]

This is an interesting article about the expansion talks....

A&M Could Throw Off Big 12 Six Targeted By Pac-10

Colorado has already announced it's heading west.

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State and Oklahoma are waiting for a formal announcement by Nebraska about joining the Big Ten before announcing that they, too, are headed west to the Pac-10.

But sources say Texas A&M is still seriously exploring joining the Southeastern Conference. That charge is being led by A&M regent Gene Stallings, who, of course, won a national title in 1992 at Alabama as head coach.

There appears to be divided sentiment in the A&M community between going west and going to the SEC.

SEC Commissioner Mike Slive appears to be pulling out every enticement he can to lure Texas and Texas A&M to the SEC, including possibly moving two teams from the SEC West to the SEC East to allow Texas and Texas A&M in the SEC West, one source with knowledge of the SEC said.

But Texas does not appear interested in the SEC no matter what.

Texas A&M athletic director Bill Byrne, who used to be the AD at Oregon before moving on to Nebraska, has taken a hard stand about not wanting to travel west and used cities inside the Pac-10 as his examples. Stallings is also putting pressure on the situation.

 

[VegasTide]

I'd rather not add anyone. The problem, though, is that we know Colorado is going to the PAC-10 and Nebraska is all but gone to the Big Ten, which makes the Big 12 basically unsalvageable. The Big 12 would have to add some combination of Utah-BYU-TCU to replace those two programs just to keep the championship game. Given how shaky the Big 12 conference is in the first place, I think the big schools are looking for an excuse to leave.

Once that happens, the PAC-10 is going to snap up at least Oklahoma State and Texas Tech, which leaves Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma essentially holding a bidding war. The SEC can't afford to let all three of those schools go to the PAC-10 unless they can then in turn add North Carolina and Virginia at the very least, and probably Virginia Tech and someone out of the Miami-NC State-Maryland-West Virginia-Missouri basket, although none of those (other than perhaps Missouri) really excite me.

I think it's clear right now that Texas is fishing for a deal. They seem to prefer the PAC-10 but would take the Big Ten or the SEC if and only if one of those conferences spit-shines their boots, and I doubt the SEC is going to bow to that. All it takes are four "no" votes and I just don't see Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Florida or Tennessee bowing to Texas, particularly when you can get A&M with less fuss and access the same television market.

Where the SEC is over a barrel is if they lose the "Big 12 Six" to the PAC-10, and then can't convince North Carolina to join up. Then you're left with inviting Missouri and Virginia/Virginia Tech to join up, and although that gives you the D.C/Baltimore and St. Louis TV markets, it's not a splash on the level of landing some of the top Big 12 schools (Missouri doesn't qualify as such, sorry Mizzou). Because we don't gain anything by inviting Georgia Tech, Clemson or NC State, and it's questionable how much would be gained by inviting Florida State, Miami, West Virginia or Louisville. Maryland has potential but really, they don't fit the SEC mindset.

And on a side note, I really can't understand what's taking the Big Ten so long to invite Missouri.

My prediction as of 11:40 p.m. 6-10-10: SEC gets Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma and probably Virginia Tech. I would prefer North Carolina came rather than Missouri but they're not asking me.

I don't think too many people in the SEC would have a problem w/ that prediction. As to your comments regarding UNC. I fully understand they're a football program that is getting better and is currently considered 'good', but I think thats a very tough pull considering their connection to ACC basketball. There are VERY few schools in the country who bank on basketball revenue and UNC is one of them (I think Duke and UK are the only other 2).

As another poster stated, I think the only way that happens is if we could pull Duke along with them. Now that would be interesting because it would bring in some solid basketball TV revenue as well. (I know, I know, football is the revenue king)

All that said, I don't have a clue whats going on nor where its going to end up. :wink:

 

[ElephanTideis]

My prediction as of 11:40 p.m. 6-10-10: SEC gets Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma and probably Virginia Tech. I would prefer North Carolina came rather than Missouri but they're not asking me.

I would rather have UNC as well. All of those are sexy additions, sans Missouri. They are just a turn off.

 

[LCN]

At this hour (LOL) I'm going with Oklahoma , Texas A&M and .... nobody else until there's another realignment in fewer years than most would think or hope . If this were to be the way things settled , the barn moves to the SEC East .

 

[Dallas4Bama]

At this hour (LOL) I'm going with Oklahoma , Texas A&M and .... nobody else until there's another realignment in fewer years than most would think or hope . If this were to be the way things settled , the barn moves to the SEC East .

Who else moves east?
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[Crimson Cat]

Jess, I think your prediction is as close to right as any I've seen so far. And the thing with TX is spot on. They want preferential treatment, so forget it.
I do disagree on one point: have my doubts about OU coming. I think they are totally tied to UT. If we're taking a powerhouse team though, I'd rather it be OU.

 

[RedStar]

I don't think too many people in the SEC would have a problem w/ that prediction. As to your comments regarding UNC. I fully understand they're a football program that is getting better and is currently considered 'good', but I think thats a very tough pull considering their connection to ACC basketball. There are VERY few schools in the country who bank on basketball revenue and UNC is one of them (I think Duke and UK are the only other 2).

As another poster stated, I think the only way that happens is if we could pull Duke along with them. Now that would be interesting because it would bring in some solid basketball TV revenue as well. (I know, I know, football is the revenue king)

All that said, I don't have a clue whats going on nor where its going to end up. :wink:

Not sure about Duke or UNC, but Kentucky's football team actually outearns their basketball team, and it's not even close.

 

[buzzincuzzin]

None of the big boys want any part of the SEC. It's MONEY first and playing in the last game of the year second. The SEC offers the best shot at neither.

 

[CrimsonMapper]

\ As to your comments regarding UNC. I fully understand they're a football program that is getting better and is currently considered 'good', but I think thats a very tough pull considering their connection to ACC basketball. There are VERY few schools in the country who bank on basketball revenue and UNC is one of them (I think Duke and UK are the only other 2).

As another poster stated, I think the only way that happens is if we could pull Duke along with them. Now that would be interesting because it would bring in some solid basketball TV revenue as well. (I know, I know, football is the revenue king)

All that said, I don't have a clue whats going on nor where its going to end up. :wink:

Duke and UNC will definitely sell themselves as a package deal. Yesterday, I was sure that both were not options. Now, I'm not as sure. I still think that a more likely scenario will be the SEC poaching two other ACC teams, with the ACC absorbing some of the Big East power basketball teams to create a Bball super conference (UCONN, Georgetown, Louisville, etc...). Although, the Big East already had 16 teams in basketball.

 

[Boclive]

Oklahoma would be a coup and the SEC would be the best thing that ever happened to Texas A&M. It would also get the SEC on the TV's of Texas. Those two I like. I'm given to understand UNC is a long-shot pick.

Missouri? Why not Baylor?

 

[rizolltizide]

One thing I sure see happening with myself--I do consider myself to have some "conference loyaly", I probably won't have as much of that going forward. 12 schools, with a few I despise but most I'll pull for, suits me a lot better than 16 or so teams with 6+ of them I couldn't really care less about.

Man the face of college football is changing before our eyes, completely about money, and I'm not so sure I like where it's headed. Regional conferences make so much sense. But when does the world really use common sense anymore?

 

[rbvols]

I'd rather not add anyone. The problem, though, is that we know Colorado is going to the PAC-10 and Nebraska is all but gone to the Big Ten, which makes the Big 12 basically unsalvageable. The Big 12 would have to add some combination of Utah-BYU-TCU to replace those two programs just to keep the championship game. Given how shaky the Big 12 conference is in the first place, I think the big schools are looking for an excuse to leave.

Once that happens, the PAC-10 is going to snap up at least Oklahoma State and Texas Tech, which leaves Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma essentially holding a bidding war. The SEC can't afford to let all three of those schools go to the PAC-10 unless they can then in turn add North Carolina and Virginia at the very least, and probably Virginia Tech and someone out of the Miami-NC State-Maryland-West Virginia-Missouri basket, although none of those (other than perhaps Missouri) really excite me.

I think it's clear right now that Texas is fishing for a deal. They seem to prefer the PAC-10 but would take the Big Ten or the SEC if and only if one of those conferences spit-shines their boots, and I doubt the SEC is going to bow to that. All it takes are four "no" votes and I just don't see Alabama, Georgia, LSU, Florida or Tennessee bowing to Texas, particularly when you can get A&M with less fuss and access the same television market.

Where the SEC is over a barrel is if they lose the "Big 12 Six" to the PAC-10, and then can't convince North Carolina to join up. Then you're left with inviting Missouri and Virginia/Virginia Tech to join up, and although that gives you the D.C/Baltimore and St. Louis TV markets, it's not a splash on the level of landing some of the top Big 12 schools (Missouri doesn't qualify as such, sorry Mizzou). Because we don't gain anything by inviting Georgia Tech, Clemson or NC State, and it's questionable how much would be gained by inviting Florida State, Miami, West Virginia or Louisville. Maryland has potential but really, they don't fit the SEC mindset.

And on a side note, I really can't understand what's taking the Big Ten so long to invite Missouri.

My prediction as of 11:40 p.m. 6-10-10: SEC gets Texas A&M, Missouri, Oklahoma and probably Virginia Tech. I would prefer North Carolina came rather than Missouri but they're not asking me.

I live in Tulsa and am listening to the local "Sports Animal" radio broadcast here and they are saying that they believe that Tx, A&M, TT, OU, Ok. St. will all eventually go to the PAC 10/16. The only team that is balking is A&M who is pondering going to the SEC, thanks to Coach Stallings. But they believe A&M will eventually go to the PAC 10 too.

 

[BigEasyTider]

Jess,

It goes without saying that we all hold your opinion in high esteem, but I just cannot see any of this happening.

While I agree that North Carolina would be the biggest prize addition to the East, I just don't see any way that we will ever realistically see conference splits between Texas and Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, and North Carolina and Duke, which is what will be required to make this happen.

If I'm wrong then I'm wrong and I'll gladly admit it, but I just cannot see that as feasible right now.

 

[JD95]

Oklahoma would be a coup and the SEC would be the best thing that ever happened to Texas A&M. It would also get the SEC on the TV's of Texas. Those two I like. I'm given to understand UNC is a long-shot pick.

Missouri? Why not Baylor?

The SEC would be a great move for A&M and for the conference. Gets the Aggies out from under UT's shadow, and makes the SEC a big-time player in Texas. If we get A&M, we don't need Baylor (and apparently no one else wants them either). Missouri, on the other hand, adds another state and the St. Louis / Kansas City television markets. Much more valuable addition than Baylor or another minor Texas school.

 

[RedStar]

Jess,

It goes without saying that we all hold your opinion in high esteem, but I just cannot see any of this happening.

While I agree that North Carolina would be the biggest prize addition to the East, I just don't see any way that we will ever realistically see conference splits between Texas and Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, and North Carolina and Duke, which is what will be required to make this happen.

If I'm wrong then I'm wrong and I'll gladly admit it, but I just cannot see that as feasible right now.

I guess I don't understand why that's such a big hangup for everyone. Yeah they'd be in different conferences, but as a lot of people have pointed out, they'd still be able to play each other every year a la UGA/Ga Tec, ND/USC, UF/FSU, Clemson/USCe, etc...