A different approach to expansion?

[ScoobaDawg]

So the Pac 10 wants Texas and Texas A&M..and to get them they have to take Texas Tech and now Baylor
They also want OU and OSU

Could the SEC follow this same plan and invite all 6 of these schools and make them a 3rd division?

<span style="font-weight: bold;">East </span><br style="font-weight: bold;">UK
USC
UF
UGA
UT
Vandy<br style="font-weight: bold;"><br style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Central</span>
MSU
UM
LSU
ARK
UA
AU
<br style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">West</span>
Texas
Tx A&M
OU
OSU
Baylor
TxTech

3 Divisions work across the Pro Sports...why not create the truly best Conference in the Nation with this
Texas is not going anywhere with out Tech likely and is why the Pac10 is taking the lead right now over the Big 10

Thoughts?

 

[Mjoelner]

One hold-up for Texas, and I don't know how big it is, going to the Pac-10 is the fact that Texas is very serious about starting their own TV network. According to a Rivals article, Slive said this week that schools can explore thier own networks in the SEC. The Pac-10 will not allow it. So now, the Big-10 may be back in the lead since Texas is apparently balking at SEC academics and the Pac-10 network deal.

 

[catvet]

with sorting out tournment seedings and problems with scheduling and maintaining traditional rivals. C-USA tried the three divisions with a red, white and blue setup, although they only had twelve teams. This didnt seem to work very well.


I believe that super conferences are comming and that the SEC should be proactive. AD Bill Byrne and Texas A & M have aparently made overtures to the SEC, basically because the incredible problems with travel in the PAC-10--say to Pullman, Washington-and they already have local ties: they have had series with LSU and Arkansas for a while. Texas believes that they are above everything and I can see them becomming an independant and being one of the few schools able to pull this off. To get access to new markets and not be geographically boxed in, I would invite Texas, A & M, Oklahoma and Okie State with the full understanding that Texas is not going to join. I believe that the others might: the Governor of Texas is an Aggie and at this point I believe that Texas and A & M would not have to be a package deal as long as they played each other in sports on a yearly basis. When Texas turns us down, we should look at Clemson, FSU, Miami, TCU and Tulane ( the confernece needs another bottom feeder ). This would give us new markets in Texas and Oklahoma and shore up our power base in the Southeast.

Thoughts?

 

[ScoobaDawg]

Pac 10 would not allow them to have the local rights to create their own channel.
Staying in the Big 12 would..but that option is pretty much dead.
Texas has already partnered with a firm for the past couple years to explore the process of creating their own network..they would be allowed to continue this in the SEC but not in the Pac10..
So the only way Texas can get their own TV Channel is to stay in the Big 12 (not likely) or come to the SEC

Only reason they would want to goto the Big10 would be to part of the CiC research money...Tx and A&M are the only AAU schools in the Big 12 and the state is working hard to bring Texas Tech (and other schools with the passage of Prop 4 last year) upto Tier 1 Status. In the SEC, We have 2 AAU (UF and Vandy) and 10 Tier 1 (only MSU and Um are not) schools. Pac 10 is full of both AAU and Tier 1.
Check out this story on the Ohio State president talking with Texas President and Big 10 Commissioner... Texas tells them they have a "tech" problem.

Texas is truly the key to the expansions for the Pac10 or Big 10 and if they are or are not in the SEC picture..when they do move it will set things in motion that the SEC will have to respond.

 

[ckDOG]

Obviously, any conference would love to tout its academic achievements and prestige. I understand "boosting the resume"...whatever. However, the majority of SEC, Big 10, Big 12, Pac 10, ACC, athletes couldn't care less about academic reputation. They want a solid free education (hopefully) while potentially giving themselves the chance to move on to the professional level.

My question is, "what the hell does it matter?" What benefit does it serve to for an institution, that its well aware and confident of its academic reputation outside of the world of sports, to be in a conference that has x percent of AAU, Tier 1, etc. schools? Bragging rights? Simply an image thing?

Seriously, let's not act like the goals of major conferences are to give athletes an ivy league education. They are there to exploit athletes and make a lot of 17-ing money with lucrative media contracts - not to develop the leaders of tomorrow.

 

[catvet]

and state that academics have zero to do with what is happerning. The same is true about all other sports outside of football. This is all about college football money pouring into the coffers at the conference schools. There hasn't been any doubt that college football long ago became a businees, now it is moving to the category of a very exclusive club, where only a few a selected to join. There will be all types of lawsuits I predict when a few of the club members are left out in the cold and are not selected to join the chosen few super conferences. What are Kansas, Kansas State, Baylor, etc going to do when the stability of the Big 8/Big 12 is dissolved and they are left scrambling to join the Mt. West, C-USAs of the world: lawsuits. Lawsiuts about access to the big dollars and televison access that they have been denied. It will be interesting over the next two years watching all of this play out.

And all of this could be avoided if those self righteous pricks at Notre Dame whould end their delusional believe that they still matter to college sports and just join the Big 10.

 

[ScoobaDawg]

Read up a little on how big of a deal the Committee on Institutional Cooperation (CIC) I mentioned is....Every member of the Big 10 (Plus University of Chicago...a founding big 10 member) is in the club.
The CIC Bring in 6 BILLION (500million each member) each year in research funding that is spread around, meanwhile us members of the SEC are happy to get $200 million on our own.
The SEC has a negative image of academics around the country as a whole and is working to improve this by creating the SEC Academic Network and the Southeastern Conference Academic Consortium (A young version of the CIC of the Big10 without the reputation)

A good article that goes into more details of the Academics and Politics can be found here by Mr.SEC
To other conferences such as the Pac10 and Big10 the conference isn't just about on the field athletics it is just as important to look at the Academics of the university's.
Contrary to believe of most of us here in the SEC... the university is more than athletics.

 

[ScoobaDawg]

<span style="font-weight: bold;">with sorting out tournment seedings and problems with scheduling and maintaining traditional rivals. C-USA tried the three divisions with a red, white and blue setup, although they only had twelve teams. This didnt seem to work very well. </span><br style="font-weight: bold;">

I believe that super conferences are comming and that the SEC should be proactive. AD Bill Byrne and Texas A & M have aparently made overtures to the SEC, basically because the incredible problems with travel in the PAC-10--say to Pullman, Washington-and they already have local ties: they have had series with LSU and Arkansas for a while. Texas believes that they are above everything and I can see them becomming an independant and being one of the few schools able to pull this off. To get access to new markets and not be geographically boxed in, I would invite Texas, A & M, Oklahoma and Okie State with the full understanding that Texas is not going to join. I believe that the others might: the Governor of Texas is an Aggie and at this point I believe that Texas and A & M would not have to be a package deal as long as they played each other in sports on a yearly basis. When Texas turns us down, we should look at Clemson, FSU, Miami, TCU and Tulane ( the confernece needs another bottom feeder ). This would give us new markets in Texas and Oklahoma and shore up our power base in the Southeast.

Thoughts?

I dont see how it would be that difficult, Football scheduling would be a schedule of this sort. two options 8 or 9 game conference would work something like this
You play the rest of your division (5 games) plus a permanent rival game from one of the other divisions ( +1) and then either one other rotating from each division for 8 or for 9 you would have 2 from one division and 1 from another divsion

So example<span style="font-weight: bold;"> <span style="font-weight: bold;"></span></span>for 8 games the opponents would be from our division (AU,UA,Ark,LSU,UM) Plus permanent rival (Kentucky is ours now so keep that), Plus one from each division (Georgia, Texas A&M)
For a 9 game add another from either the West or East divisions.

<span style="font-weight: bold;">

</span>

 

[ckDOG]

The prime focus of any academic institution should be the betterment of their education programs. Otherwise, what's the point? I just think it's hypocritical, or at the very least humorous, that power athletic conferences put this big front up regarding high quality academics when in reality all they really care about is television market share and competitive athletics. Without a doubt, the main goal of athletic conferences are to produce competitive athletic teams, NOT a quiz bowl. Any argument otherwise is simply PR and window dressing.

I'll always push that MSU or any other institution better their academic resume to attract better students. If the conference wants to advertise those achievements (i.e. gravy on top of the athletic achievements), that's fine with me, but to assert that it's some sort of prerequisite for being part of a sports group is simply unrealistic. The SEC or any other conference exists for one overriding goal --- producing the most competitive amateur collegiate athletics group possible.

If athletic conferences want to advertise themselves as being associated with some sort of premier academic standards, then maybe they should put their money where their mouths are and start holding their athletes to a premier standard? If they can do that, then there is something to brag about. Otherwise, it's just an image leveraged off something totally independent of what the group can influence itself. Sports don't drive academic reputation.

 

[catvet]

<span style="font-weight: bold;">with sorting out tournment seedings and problems with scheduling and maintaining traditional rivals. C-USA tried the three divisions with a red, white and blue setup, although they only had twelve teams. This didnt seem to work very well. </span><br style="font-weight: bold;">




I believe that super conferences are comming and that the SEC should be proactive. AD Bill Byrne and Texas A & M have aparently made overtures to the SEC, basically because the incredible problems with travel in the PAC-10--say to Pullman, Washington-and they already have local ties: they have had series with LSU and Arkansas for a while. Texas believes that they are above everything and I can see them becomming an independant and being one of the few schools able to pull this off. To get access to new markets and not be geographically boxed in, I would invite Texas, A & M, Oklahoma and Okie State with the full understanding that Texas is not going to join. I believe that the others might: the Governor of Texas is an Aggie and at this point I believe that Texas and A & M would not have to be a package deal as long as they played each other in sports on a yearly basis. When Texas turns us down, we should look at Clemson, FSU, Miami, TCU and Tulane ( the confernece needs another bottom feeder ). This would give us new markets in Texas and Oklahoma and shore up our power base in the Southeast.



Thoughts?

I dont see how it would be that difficult, Football scheduling would be a schedule of this sort. two options 8 or 9 game conference would work something like this
You play the rest of your division (5 games) plus a permanent rival game from one of the other divisions ( +1) and then either one other rotating from each division for 8 or for 9 you would have 2 from one division and 1 from another divsion

So example<span style="font-weight: bold;"> <span style="font-weight: bold;"></span></span>for 8 games the opponents would be from our division (AU,UA,Ark,LSU,UM) Plus permanent rival (Kentucky is ours now so keep that), Plus one from each division (Georgia, Texas A&M)
For a 9 game add another from either the West or East divisions.

<span style="font-weight: bold;">

</span>

We should strive to make MSU well recognized in academics, but this has nothing to do with academics: its all about money, or why else would Texas talk about starting its own network--how does that help academics. And the Big 12 is not often mistaken for the Ivy League.

Part of the problem with academics is that a major portion of these ratings are based on reputation and that being the case, no one from up north is going to recognize us as an equal. You also have to throw in the built in bias for non liberal arts schools, since the prevailing opinion is that Ag schools are not on par. Alot of the endowments for our rust belt friends were built on industry which has crumbled in the past thirty years and has accelerated in the past ten--to favor the South in bringing in industry and manufactiring. As more money pours into the region, you will see a shift in school reputations as more is invested. If idiots like the members of the Mississippi legislature are not allowed to destroy higher ed, then we can advance: yes, I believe that Mississippi should do like Texas and split most of the money between Ole Miss and MSU, like the oil money is split between Texas and A & M. It is better to have two well funded and highly successful schools as opposed to eight schools just trying to get by: if that means to close others so be it. We have got to get to the point in this state where we separate a want from a need.

Finally, we are top ten ranked in agriculture, architecture, landscape architecture. We are top twenty ranked in entomology, weed science/plant pathology. We are top fifty ranked in engineering expenditures with only Florida in the SEC above us. We have dominated the Eco-car competition, won meterology forecasting championships the past two years and make the best cheese in the nation. We dominate: try to get Edam cheese from Illinois.

 

[TR.sixpack]

Finally, we are top ten ranked in agriculture, architecture, landscape architecture.

I'm pretty sure that's never happened.