I think the SEC's best move is to stand pat.

[jcdawgman18]

Why, you ask? For several reasons.<div>
</div><div>1) We still play the best football. What does it matter if the Big 10 and Pac 10 get bigger, the programs within those conferences will still be basically what they were. The SEC champion will continue to be the National Champion most years, automatically making us (meaning the conference) relevant. </div><div>2) There is some risk with creating a 16-team conference, namely beating each other up so much through the year that no one has anything left come bowl season (or potentially playoff time). Look at how the Big East teams fared in the NCAA tournament this year. They all looked dead.</div><div>3) Our current TV deal with ESPN has nine (I think) years remaining. That gives us lots of guaranteed security. Thus, we can wait this whole process out and see how it plays out. If this really is the direction all of this is headed, it's not like we can't go get some teams from the ACC or Big East (whichever one survives) to come join us. There's simply not enough room for the Big 10 to absorb them all.</div><div>
</div><div>In the end, I do think we're going to stand pat. It just seems like the safest play.</div>

 

[jcdawgman18]

Why, you ask? For several reasons.<div>
</div><div>1) We still play the best football. What does it matter if the Big 10 and Pac 10 get bigger, the programs within those conferences will still be basically what they were. The SEC champion will continue to be the National Champion most years, automatically making us (meaning the conference) relevant. </div><div>2) There is some risk with creating a 16-team conference, namely beating each other up so much through the year that no one has anything left come bowl season (or potentially playoff time). Look at how the Big East teams fared in the NCAA tournament this year. They all looked dead.</div><div>3) Our current TV deal with ESPN has nine (I think) years remaining. That gives us lots of guaranteed security. Thus, we can wait this whole process out and see how it plays out. If this really is the direction all of this is headed, it's not like we can't go get some teams from the ACC or Big East (whichever one survives) to come join us. There's simply not enough room for the Big 10 to absorb them all.</div><div>
</div><div>In the end, I do think we're going to stand pat. It just seems like the safest play.</div>

 

[Todd4State]

with some friends and one of them said something that made a whole lot of sense to me- He said "why expand and split the pie 16 ways when you can split it 12 ways?"

The SEC should not expand for the sake of expanding.

The downside is the SEC would certianly miss out on Texas and Texas A&M in the future.

 

[RobbieRandolph]

If we can get Texas/TAMU and/or UNC/Duke then yes expand. Both of those pairs are national brands and bring new markets and revenue streams to the league, therefore all but guaranteeing a re-negotiation with CBS and ESPN thus increasing the total amount of incoming revenue and keeping each team's payout the same if not increasing it.

Unlike our last expansion, we should not take our "2nd choice" of universities to expand for the sake of expansion.

 

[jcdawgman18]

If we can get Texas/TAMU and/or UNC/Duke then yes expand. Both of those pairs are national brands and bring new markets and revenue streams to the league, therefore all but guaranteeing a re-negotiation with CBS and ESPN thus increasing the total amount of incoming revenue and keeping each team's payout the same if not increasing it.

Unlike our last expansion, we should not take our "2nd choice" of universities to expand for the sake of expansion.

But I kinda like it. If we did end up expanding, I would rather have Va Tech over them, but if we couldn't get the Hokies, the Dukies wouldn't be a bad addition. Another Vandy in football, but highly elevates our position in basketball.

 

[Dawgpile]

Sure the SEC is on top now, but you have to be lookingto your futureas good business policy.

<font style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff">I'm certain the pie wouldn't get smaller if we added newtv markets.
</font>

 

[UpTheMiddlex3Punt]

Any expansion plans should have the following questions asked:
1) Does the expansion add significant value (new markets, reputation, money)?
2) How does the expansion affect the stability of the conference?

The problem with adding the Texas and Oklahoma schools is that they would still sort of be in their own little bubble in an expanded conference. I'm not convinced that the PAC-16, if it happens, will be stable in the long run. If we were to add too many schools that could leave at any point, it may end up destroying the SEC.

We still have the best college football product around and do not need to do anything to jeopardize that.

 

[thatsbaseball]

High profile schools and new TV markets.

Edited to add:brand new lucrative TV markets

 

[RobbieRandolph]

Imagine you're an SEC Pres or AD. We already have the most difficult football league in the country. Other conference expansions will not pass us by in terms of football strength. Texas and Oklahoma alongside USC doesn't make the Pac10 > SEC. Bama, UF, LSU could go head to head with those 3 year in, year out. So why do you want to expand? To increase revenue streams and gain new markets. UNC/Duke strengthen the basketball league exponentially while bringing in 1 cellar football team with a tier 1 academic rep, and a mid-tiered football team that again is a tier 1 academic university. Therefore the balance of the football league is generally kept intact (the big boys aren't being one-upped) and everything else is elevated.

Now if Texas and TAMU want to come in, UF and Bama are going to have to deal with another football powerhouse as the money those 2 schools will bring into the league is almost astronomical.

 

[beachbumdawg]

with some friends and one of them said something that made a whole lot of sense to me- He said "why expand and split the pie 16 ways when you can split it 12 ways?"

The SEC should not expand for the sake of expanding.

The downside is the SEC would certianly miss out on Texas and Texas A&M in the future.

it was mentioned on the WWL that if the league (SEC) were to expand and/or contract that the SEC per their agreement with the networks would be able to re-negotiate the deal with all the networks.....so i think if the right teams were to join it could actually increase revenue to the league

 

[patdog]

Any new school would have to bring $20M per year in additional revenue to the SEC. Very few schools could do that. Texas obviously could, but whether they turned the SEC down or the SEC turned them down, that ship appears to have sailed. I think the SEC's most likely move is to stand pat. I could possibly see them adding Texas A&M, North Carolina or one of the Virginia schools, but I don't think any of those will happen.

 

[ckDOG]

I probably missed this article in the multiple posts, but I'll post again. It makes a lot of sense.

Get a solid Texas program on the cheap while driving up the price of UT for the Pac 10 by forcing them to take Baylor and TTech with them. That deal has a lot less value than it did when TAMU was originally part of it. For us, we still get in the Texas market, but we don't have to deal with UT. I could share a conference with Aggie fans WAYYYYYY before UT fans.

VA Teach or UNC would be a great east coast complement for more TV markets. Cap it at 14 and stop - no need to make it any more complicated than it has to be.

 

[TheStateUofMS]

with some friends and one of them said something that made a whole lot of sense to me- He said "why expand and split the pie 16 ways when you can split it 12 ways?"

The SEC should not expand for the sake of expanding.


The downside is the SEC would certianly miss out on Texas and Texas A&M in the future.

Why in the world do people want Texas? Texas would make things even harder for us to ever win a SEC championship. Texas A&M wouldn't make things easier either although I do think we could compete with Texas A&M for talent and conference positioning, but certainly not Texas. That's just another Bama, LSU, or Florida to whip our *** on a regular basis. <div>
</div><div>On the flip side, all this might keep Dan in Starkville if the conference did expand because the SEC would be that must stronger and make the MSU job better in the eyes of outsiders.</div>

 

[fishwater99]

Texas, Texas A&M,Oklahoma, & Oklahoma State....

 

[catvet]

and stop at 14. A & M gives us inroads into the Texas market and Virginia gives us Virginia, Washington DC and Baltimore. They are also SEC type athletic programs. The problem is that the state of Texas will not allow UT and TAMU to be in seperate conferences. So I would add Missouri for the St. Louis/Kansas City markets along with VTech. Clemson, Geo Tech, FSU and Miami really add nothing since they do not bring in new markets.

 

[Hector.sixpack]

I just can't see any Texas school or Oklahoma school in the Pac10. There's plenty of good football in the geographic region of the Big12 to have a good conference with good TV deals. I think ND will join the Big10, and the Big12 won't lose anymore (good teams anyway). To me the Pac10 looks stupid offering schools halfway across the country, while there at it, go ahead and try to lure some Florida teams, or Va Tech. To me, a conference should build a reputation before soliciting themselves.</p>

 

[Agentdog]

I think you are right Hector. What can the Pac10 offer to Texas and company that the Big12 does not and is better than the SEC in the future?

Texas, A&M, OU, and OSU are going to wait for the SEC. They want the SEC for the money, football prestige, and geography (lesser sports). The SEC will want them eventually for the TV markets of Texas. Meanwhile, I imagine those schools help the Big12 find replacements and continue to wait a few more years until the SEC is ready to accept them.

This is the best thread on this subject so far.

 

[Canis]

http://www.texags.com/main/forum.reply.asp?topic_id=1635175&forum_id=5

Apparently a local sports radio show is claiming they got the invite to the SEC. A&M coming here would make some sense. It would open up a slot for Baylor in the proposed PAC-16 which would appease the Texas legislature and open up Texas TV markets to the SEC. Seems most A&M fans believe they would be a better fit for the SEC although I still think this is probably a BS rumor.

 

[patdog]

If all they lose is Nebraska, the could still add Utah and be a viable BCS conference. And one Texas would still control. If they leave for the PAC-10, there'd be more money, but it would also be split more ways. And Texas would lose a lot of control. Despite all the reports that the PAC-16 is a done deal, I'm not convinced it is.</p>

 

[MrHooch]

I'm curious what the message boards for schools like TAMU, UT, VA Tech, OSU, OK, etc. are saying about all this potential conference shifting...

 

[Steakonastick]

tamu is going to go where ever texas goes. With colorado already going to the pac-10 shows the balls are starting to role. If neb leaves the big 12 to joing the big 10 the big 12 will go away. Nebraksa was their only major tv market team other then texas and oklahoma. If im slive I offer texas and a&m and if they say no you look east to add 4 either gt, miami, fsu, clemson, or V.T. If the sec decides to wait a few years we could miss out on the major acc teams. After all this dust settles I bet conferences are going to make teams sign major contracts with huge buyouts if they want to jump ship every few years.

 

[MedDawg]

It's hard enough on us already, and y'all want to add Texas and Oklahoma?</p>

 

[Oxford Godfrey]

No one will make fun of Starkville anymore.

 

[jakldawg]

since writing their articles just got easier

Ctrl+H
Find what: Starkville
Replace with: Ames

done!

 

[MaroonInNashville]

Says they like the idea of being in the SEC