SEC and The Big 12

DawgNDuckFanoffline · **Posted:** Sun Jul 25, 2004 10:16 pm

Quote:

If they are truly rivals, then A & M would have joined back in the early 90's.

That's like saying UF and FSU aren't rivals because they don't play in the same conference. FSU has never been in the same conference as UF. Never. Now GT has been in the same conference as UGA and South Carolina has been in the same conference as Clemson before.

sportsgeog · **Joined:** Thu May 27, 2004 5:53 pm **Posts:** 321

Quote:

That's like saying UF and FSU aren't rivals because they don't play in the same conference. FSU has never been in the same conference as UF. Never. Now GT has been in the same conference as UGA and South Carolina has been in the same conference as Clemson before.

Okay, scratch that. There's Iowa/Iowa State, Colorado/Colorado State, Utah/Utah State, BYU/Utah State, Clemson/South Carolina. Norte Dame/USC, etc.

My point is if A & M wanted to be in the same conference with LSU if they had the chance, and its sounds like they did at one time, then they would chosen to be there. But this proves my point, a number of rivals exist out there that are not in the same conference, it doesn't mean they should abandon other rivals or long-term series in their own respective conferences and join to be with that rival and a new conference that they only have very marginal relationships with the other members of that conference that their out-of-conference rival is in.

sportsgeog · **Joined:** Thu May 27, 2004 5:53 pm **Posts:** 321

Quote:

Money talks and everything else walks. The ACC feared a loss of money by not expanding so they went to 12. Whats not to say the same situation could not play out again 10 years down the road that forces one of the BCS conferences to eat their brother? If TV money shifted back to the the Big East with Rutgers and UConn emerging as national powers whats to prevent the Big 10 or the ACC from grabbing more Big East teams especially in the case of the Big10 who needs just one more school for 12. Or would the BigXII slide in the power rankings, making the SEC look more attractive for Texas and TexasA&M.

Now going from 16 to 14 makes infinetly less sense. After Texas and Texas A&M, who else would provide more TV dollars for the SEC. Court MiamiFl and Florida St from the ACC? I don't think that would work. The Big 10 won't expand beyond 12 if they could get Notre Dame but if they go after Syracuse or Rutgers first for some reason I could see 14 there with ND eventually giving up. 16 in the Big 10 noway. The PAC-10 at this point is probably capped at 12 unless they try and bridge to Texas/TAMU.

As I see it, the big prizes out there to expand beyond 12 for a BCS conference are Texas/TAMU and Notre Dame. The Big XII is the most vulnerable out of the Big 5 because nobody in the PAC-10, Big10, SEC would be interested in leaving their conference to do 14 with the BigXII.

I would say that traditon, and the inability to play more than 12 games in a season, ala the fear of the WAC-16 failure also in an inhibitor to this scenario happening. I'm not saying that a whole new dynamic may not happen in the future that could impact all of college football alliances, but these forces can balance with money. Oklahoma and TTU are the achors for UT and A & M in the Big 12. Only Arkansas is the pull in the SEC direction because of a former long-term alliance. Sacrifincing Alabama/Tennessee rivalry just to get UT and A & M in the SEC or Alabama/Auburn seems a bit of a stretch.

As far as the Big 10. If the College football landscape does change and there is a movement to 16-team superconferences, and this happens either with the Rose Bowl gradually losing the tradition of Big 10/Pac 10, or a movement to a college football playoff, then 4 16-superconferences may come into existance where there is less emphasis on the conference, but more on the division, then you may see sweeping changes with college football alliances. This is a point where college football traditions are watered-down, and then global conference and divisional alignment happens across the board.

bobcatdude · **Joined:** Wed Jul 14, 2004 12:55 pm **Posts:** 17

Until every conference out there is sitting at 12 members, you probably will not be seeing any membership above that number.

And I think you are looking at it from the wrong side of the scope. The Big XII has quickly become the strongest in most sports, baseball, football, track, softball, basketball, that it might already eclipse the SEC and ACC in athletic power. Given that, I would think school would stay in the Big XII.

I honestly think it is the Big XII's show. They jettison Baylor and Iowa State, bring in Colorado State and Arkansas and they solidfy the conference and rivalries old and new. But rivalries in the Big XII right now will keep UT and TAMU from going elsewhere.

Even the Division I schools in Texas hold a lot of power, meaning the private ones like TCU, SMU, Rice, Baylor, etc.. If they wanted to, they could start their own domino formation by breaking off and pulling in surrounding schools to form a 12 team conference which would immeidately have regionality, rivalries, history and tradition. Those items in place could draw teams, money and television immediately. It is speculation, so more on this can be found in the Dream Conferences thread in the main expansion forum.

footballgod · **Posted:** Wed Jul 28, 2004 5:51 pm

Quote:

And I think you are looking at it from the wrong side of the scope. The Big XII has quickly become the strongest in most sports, baseball, football, track, softball, basketball, that it might already eclipse the SEC and ACC in athletic power. Given that, I would think school would stay in the Big XII.

The Big 12 more powerful than the SEC please there is no way. If anyone can challenge the SEC it will be the ACC, unless Big 10 adds Notre Dame then it will be very powerful too.

lash · **Posted:** Wed Jul 28, 2004 8:01 pm

Joedadi, you keep posting a lot about the potential for conference to move behond 12 members and the ACC exanding futher into the east.

You are forgetting that 10 years from now the new Big East may be stonger than the ACC.

You are also forgetting that the SEC could decide to move to 14 and Miami and FSU would be prime targets.

Lets not forget the new ACC has much to prove with 12 teams. As far as I am concerned its still the Big 2 and Little 10 until someone other than FSU and Miami steps up and plays in a BCS game.

bullet · **Joined:** Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:08 pm **Posts:** 979

The SEC will not add any eastern members unless they lose somebody. They will not be able to figure out a good way to split the divisions. Auburn and Alabama do not want to be separated any more than they already are from their rivals in the east. Auburn-Georgia is the oldest series in the south. Alabama-Tennessee is a huge rivalry. Who would you move west? And if you screwed Vandy or UK (doubtful-there is still basketball) by moving them west and kept the annual opponent, that would leave just 1 game per year for the 6 teams in the other division other than your annual opponent. It wouldn't work. There is another more important reason it wouldn't work: Miami, FSU, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee-in the same division??????? It would be disaster for all of them. The schedule would just be too tough.

The ACC is set for a long time. The only ones who might leave in the next 20 or 30 years are Wake Forest and Duke if they decide to de-emphasize football.

The BE could be stronger than the ACC in fb in 10 years, but the MAC could be stronger than the BE in 10 years. The possibility is about the same-pretty remote.

SEC and The Big 12

Who is online