A lot of posters here may not know it, but a lot of Georgia Tech's traditional rivalries are in the SEC, not the ACC. GT has at least 40 years of tradition with the SEC, compared to what...20 years with the ACC???
If you're going to keep taking Arkansas out of the SEC, then how about some GT to the SEC rumors.

DawgNDuckFan,

I like the idea of Tech back in the SEC. It has a long history with Bama and Auburn as well as UGA. If Arkansas left as you suggest (though that seems unlikely), Tech could be placed in the East, and Tennessee could be moved to the West to balance out the conferences.

I doubt UGA, Auburn, or Tennessee would like to see Tech back in the conference because those teams lean pretty heavily on Georgia talent. When I lived in Atlanta I got the impression that UGA carried all the clout in-state, so Tech would find some serious resistance to their joining the SEC in their own backyard. Tech might impove their recruiting by competing in the SEC, since a majority of the high school players in Georgia (I suspect, though I could be wrong) would prefer to play in the SEC. If the competition in the SEC is as unforgiving as some SEC homers claim it to be (I agree with most that it is the best conference year in and year out, and is usually #1 or #2, depending on whether it is a weak year like this year), Tech might flounder the first couple of years and its recruiting could fall off. Tech wouldn't be much of a threat for Georgia recruits if they became another Vanderbilt. They might be better off in the ACC, where they are usually assured of at least a .500 record and a regular chance at a lower-tier bowl. Then again Arkansas and South Carolina were expected to struggle coming into the conference. Few programs were ever as low as South Carolina when they entered the conference, but I would argue that they've at least been as competitive as Ole Miss. Arkansas has been even more successful. Perhaps Tech could do the same?

I just don't see Arkansas leaving the SEC though. I think the old SWC teams in the Big 12 would keep them out. But what about South Carolina moving to the ACC? Lou might get an extra couple of wins per season that way, and the SEC could recruit any team in the southeast to fill that slot.

The only BCS squads that might make the leap (FSU and Miami are better off where they are) are Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, and Clemson. I doubt Clemson would want the competition right now, historically they've been pretty happy to beat up on the ACC as long as they get their annual shot at UGA. Virginia Tech I suspect would rather be in the same conference with UVA and the NC teams. But Tech, especially because of the prior history you've cited, might make the jump. They're fan base isn't very large, but those alumni I know would jump at the chance to play Bama and Auburn again.

What do you think of USC leaving for the ACC (admittedly Clemson would not be pleased) and Tech sliding into their place? I'd like to see Auburn move to the East and Tennessee to the West to balance the conference out, but that may better be discussed on another forum.

DND fan,

Some people assume that any team would jump at the chance to join 'their' conference. Don't count on it. Sure, a mid-major would jump at the chance to join a BCS conference that was close by, but don't count on a BCS team changing conferences.

Arkansas has no reason to want to leave the SEC, and the SEC won't even kick out Vandy. I doubt much change in either the SEC or Big 12 anytime soon. Anything beyond 12 teams is unwieldy.

The best chance for change in a BCS conference, in my humble opinion, is either the BE or ACC. The BE is suppose to be adding UConn. Both could stand to add a good FB team, but I doubt that the BB schools in either conference would stand for it.

Should a BCS conference by offering membership to 1 or more current 1A non BCS; it would set off a chain reaction. I would like to see it, but I am not holding my breath. Until then, most of this is just a dream... but it is a fun dream! :)

FBfan

ACCNole, I'm sorry for not replying earlier. I tried responding to your post before, but this aggravating site
( >:( ) wouldn't let me post it because it had too many characters. ::)


In my opinion, I wouldn't mind seeing South Carolina back in the ACC and getting Tech back. Tech has always competed very well with my Dawgs, and I personally would welcome them back with open arms. 8-) I have more comments, but I will save them for another post. 8-)

South Carolina would be let back in the ACC right after George W. Bush and Saddam Hussien exchange Valentine's Day cards. South Carolina would find resistance not only from Clemson, but the Tabbaky Road schools as well. They left on bad terms, and the hard feelings are still there. Besides, the only reason the ACC would expand would be to promote the conference football image....and adding a sub .500 all time team isn't the way to do that.

Georgia and Tennessee would pose major stumbling blocks for Ga Tech back to the SEC. It's also been almost 40 years since Ga Tech was a SEC member, and before they joined the SEC they were members of the SIAAC and Southern Conferences with all their fellow ACC members except FSU....so there are historical ties there as well.

I don't see the SEC kicking Arkansas out.....and the only way I see Arkansas leaving would be if the Big XII had an opening. Arkansas people I know have said that they feel like red headed stepchildren in the SEC and would rather be playing traditional rivals like Texas and aTm instead of teams like South Carolina and Ole Miss.

As for teams leaving the ACC...none really jump out that are obvious, but if I had to make a guess I would say it would be Clemson, Ga Tech, Virginia, or Maryland...in that order. FSU is comfortable....and the Tabakky Road schools would never leave the comfort and protection of a conference they run.

Catdaddy, Arkansas may want to play Texas again, but the 'Horns really want nothing to do with the Hawgs. Texas has longed loathed Frank Broyles recruiting methods, and they view Arkansas pretty much like they do Texas A&M: a farm school out in the middle of nowhere. The only thing keeping Texas in the same conference as A&M is because of Texas state politics. If the Horns had their way, they would be in the Pac 10 by now.

DawgNDuckFan,

I had the same problem so I split my reply into thirds over on the Big East realignment thread. I know Texas is the one school every other conference, Big 10 included, covets, but would they really join the Pac 10? The Big 10, if they thought they'd join, would love to have them. I think the SEC would open it's ranks too. Is Texas really that interested in the Pac 10? I think institutionally they have as much in common with the Big 10 schools as the Pac 10, and the Big 10 would probably be better for them financially. If they want football money, Texas could head to the SEC. I know the SEC is in the catbird seat right now, but they'd be fools not to leap at the chance to stick Texas (and for that matter A&M) in the SEC West, improving the odds for huge ratings in their title game every year. I realize their title game always does well, but they could increase the odds of showcasing some combination of Bama, Auburn, Texas, or A&M vs. Florida, Tennessee, or the Dawgs every year, they'd be fools not to do it.

I could see Texas leaving for more money in the SEC, especially because they could appease the legislature by taking A&M with them, but Texas is very high on academics, and that (not to mention being fairly happy in the Big 12) might be a deal breaker. Do you really think Texas would entertain the Pac 10 over the Big 10? I know it's always been the Pac 10's dream to add Texas and Colorado. That'll never happen without A&M though. If they thought they could pull it off, it'd be in the Big 10's best interest to expel one member and pull in Texas and A&M. That way the Texas legislature is happy, Texas gets it's academics, and Big 10 gets a title game that will bring in massive numbers. I'm sure the new Big 10 would also have a whopper of a tv contract.

Btw, I'm not disputing what you're saying, I'm just curious why Texas is so favorable to the Pac 10. Seems like they could go for bigger money and academics in the Big 10, or simply opt for the biggest money in the SEC.

catdaddy2402,

You are too right about the ACC. I think FSU would like to see football expansion, but it's tough to argue with 7 of 9 teams getting bowl money. That's major payola for a smaller conference that is (despite notable strides) at best the #3 conference in football, and at worst #5 or 6. In addition to the veyr high yield the ACC is getting from football from such a small membership, the basketball schools are still calling the shots. There's no reason for that to changes for many years. However, if UVA and Maryland and NC State continue to grow in football (and assuming FSU does not drop off the face of the earth), football will call the shots several years from now if the bowl/BCS landscape shifts. If 10 team conferences are allowed a playoff and/or the Big 10 expands or a playoff system is put in place, the football school in the ACC will force a move. But Lord knows where everyone else will be by then. If the ACC is allowed a playoff with 10 teams, there it'll be fine. But if it's forced to add three members after others have raided the most desirable schools, it's gonna make for one strange conference.

here's a thought:

if the GT and SEC were getting back together again, what about Tulane? While most are hardly powerhouses, the private schools bring an interesting and different mix to the conferences to which they are a part.

Wouldn't Tulane being back in the SEC be a great thing for Vandy? Obviously excluding ND, unless my figures are off, only Tulane and Rice out of the super prestigious private 1-A's, are not in a BCS conference...while the likes of Duke, Wake, Vandy, Northwestern, SC, and Stanford are.

Tulane would be towards the bottom of the standings, of course, but the SEC would give the school far more national visibility than it now has (and that pays dividends academically as well). It would also had plenty of prestige to the SEC. And LSU-Tulane might also mean something again in the process. Road trips for SEC fans to NO would be as much fun as Chicago is for B10 fans going on the road to play N'western, or for Pac Ten fans going to the Bay Area for Cal or Stanford.

I failed last time I posted this in early December:

now that you discussed GT, what about Tulane? If it were interested, would it be a good fit? Would Vandy be happy to see Tulane back?

Any answers now that you've had a month to think about this one: does a Green Wave belong with a Crimson Tide?

building on my last response, which of the following looks like a better (from regional as well as competitive perspectives) grouping of 12:

OLD
Tulane
LSU
Ole Miss
Miss State
Bama
Auburn
Florida
GT
Georgia
Tenn
Kentucky
Vandy

-or-

CURRENT
Ark
LSU
Ole Miss
Miss State
Ala
Auburn
Fla
SoCar
Georgia
Tenn
Vandy
Ky

Basically swapping Tulane and GT for Arkansas and So. Carolina, I feel the latter is the better fit for the SEC. At least, in terms of how they view themselves today SEC fans appreciate the big, state school mentality and to be honest I think there's more wonderment over why Vandy stayed then "what if Tulane and GT didn't leave?" (A colleague of mine who graduated from UGA last year actually thought the rumors about Vandy leaving the SEC were true!)

Granted, who knows how things would be if that old alignment had remained intact over time. GT certainly never would've owngraded their football stadium, probably ditto for Tulane. But even as an outsider I feel that the SEC is better in this more pure form of large state universities. Who knows for sure?

here's one i hate to bring up. it borders on red state/blue state insanity and i don't want to get into an insulting, conceited and smug one-upsmanship.

that said, there is certainly a perception that the SEC feels the way that Gunner describes. The universities, of course, take themselves seriously, but they see SEC membership about sports and athletics only and could well live without Vandy.

but look at the Big Ten. There is no way that it would take a 12th member in that would not be a good academic fit as well as athletic. In fact, the Big Ten, as a conference, often stresses academics over athletics and makes no bones about the fact that it would accept a lower return for sports to keep integrity and academic image high.

Two conferences, each with all public universities (except for one in each)...yet the philosophy is so different.

I can't help but feel some of the philosophy behind this is part of the divide we have in our country today.

I'm sorry; that may sound smug on my part and probably is, but I do believe the record is in place for both the B10 and SEC

Well since Indiana went solidly Republican and Ohio and Iowa went Republican while Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania went barely Democratic and Illinois went heavily Democratic, the Big 10 country looks pretty split.

Michigan, arguably the top public university in the country, has majors designed for athletes who can't cut it in the general student population. Ohio St. makes Auburn look like good by comparison. Have you been following the news lately?

So yes you are being smug. The Big 10 and SEC are two peas in a pod. Both would look for new members who are similar to the existing schools. The only difference is that the Big 10 schools are more highly regarded academically, so a similar school is a little different than a similar school in the SEC. In the slack cut for athletes, there is not much difference. The SEC actually banned Prop 12s (I think that was the term-that was a couple of academic reforms back) while the Big 10 set no official limits.

Both the SEC and Big 10 are the leaders in settling for less money by avoiding a playoff. That's because both want control more than they want money now.

If you want to talk about the political divide and compare to sports, maybe you should look at the east and left coasts. California and the northeast (blue states) don't support college football like the Big 10, SEC and Big 12 country (red states).