FSA, you may be correct indeed about the SEC may never see a NCSU & VPI combo added for 16. Also, concur those ACC schools in VA & NC are bonded even if they have their differences, which is why it would take great turmoil to produce a crack whereby a couple jump.

As to UVA, politically they had to vote for VPI for ACC expansion, and not to vote for anybody else unless VPI was approved. The Virginia Governor essentially directed the UVA to do so.

We've seen in the past, several situations where a state school really does not want an in-state sister school included in the conference; but when it gets beyond internal conference manipulation, and to the point of public relations and formal voting and most other conference members are onboard, the in-state school, in certain cases, has to exhibit an inclusive persona for in-state political and funding reasons.

The UCF to the BE was a recent example. USF ran out of opposing arguments, since the BE was in a near desperate situation.

An anaolgy may be made with Villanova's (private school) long opposition to Temple (state-related) since both were in Philly turf.

Sec03, if the rumor that keeps getting hotter every day of Clemson and Florida State bolting to the Big 12, loyalties will have not barring on which schools change conferences.

Rule of thumb, every school and that means every school is going to always be looking out for number one.

There is big concern in Hokie country of the ACC getting left out the power conference status(Big 4). Less be clear football is determining power conferences today and Va Tech is a football first school.

If the ACC loses some of its remaining major football schools, I believe Va Tech would jump to the SEC in NYC second if invited.

Ditto NC State unless prevented by state political pressure.

If NC State does not want to move, then the SEC could go after cash strapped Maryland if the conference wanted to expand to 16.

The ACC is starting to receive some of the same treatment the conference inflicted on the Big East.

All the SEC has to do is pick four or five schools they potentially want for additions and prioritize expansion. Just like the ACC actions before with expanding with Miami and having BC and Syracuse as targets with fall back on Va Tech or Pitt, Syracuse had no other option in 2003 but accept the ACC offer because the ACC would have just went with Va Tech and Pitt. In the end political pressure forced Va Tech in the ACC expansion in place of Syracuse.

These same political pressure could force some schools to stay in a certain conference or force the SEC to take multiple schools from the same state if they want to expand in that particular state (i.e. Va/Va Tech or NC/NC State. Duke and Wake Forest are both private and would not get any political pressure to keep NC and Duke together. NC may decide to remain with Duke by choice.

Same situation when the Big Ten came out with the 11 expansion target list and everyone was jumping to be included which eventually just ended up with Nebraska going to the Big Ten. It did not stop the desire to move to a stronger conference and this is determined by revenue and most important the fear of being left behind.

Unless forced by political pressure and if the ACC loses more schools, Va Tech and NC State are as good as gone if the SEC comes calling.

Yes USF, UCF was a perfect example. In CA the rule is all the CSUs have to vote in favor of a CSU joining their conf. if they're up for expansion. So Fresno was pro SJSU joining the MWC as was SDSU being pro Fresno joining. Same goes for the UCs. However UCs and CSUs don't have to vote for each other.

_________________

WRANGLERS 153-55-1 CVFL CHAMPS '04 '05 '09 '12

NFL CHAMPS '29 '30 '31 '36 '39 '44 '61 '62 '65 '66 '67 '96 '10

BW/WAC/MWC CHAMPS '77 '82 '85 '88 '89 '91 '92 '93 '99 '12
'08 NCAA BASEBALL CHAMPS

OK, if we try to look at this from an internal SEC perspective, and am not making a prediction here necessarily, we can't just factor in any two ACC as the sole variable for consideration. I see two options, given the structures and politics of the current SEC divisions. Matters such as Auburn and/or Alabama not shifting divisions, and who are cross division rivals are serious elements within the SEC whether or not they look petty to others.

Given the above: 2 options with a 16-team overall model (recognizing the SEC has not declared to seek such).

1. Expand with 2 teams to be placed in the EAST (Mizzou shifts to the WEST division).
2. Expand with 1 team to be placed in the EAST and 1 team to be placed in the WEST. No current members move.

Who would the SEC seek if option #1.
a. Can confidently rule out a BE team such as Rutgers or L'ville.
b. Can rule out C-USA & Sunbelt types.
c. The SEC would not try for WVU; they went to B12 anyway.
d. To the geographic east, only the ACC would have the plausible options.

So, which two:

a. It cannot be ruled out that the SEC would take one or even two in-footprint schools. Though they said the would not in going to 14; 16 may be a different matter, and change of minds & persuasion do happen as circumstances may change.
b. So if the above becomes true, FSU, Clemson, and GT could be considered.
c. The SEC may go for a Texas A&M type situation, meaning who is EAGER and LOBBYING the SEC. That could work for a school such as Florida State. By comparison, a Virginia or North Carolina school may not go out on the limb for such. Remember, the SEC does not take anyone unless they are free to go without entanglements for the SEC.
d. We have to assume northern tier, and non-contiguous ACC schools would be of no interest to the SEC. Throw in WFU, Duke, and Miami with the lot of not interested.
e. So the pool for "under consideration" would be FSU, Clemson, GT, UNC, NCSU, UVA, VPI and possibly Maryland.
f. To assume the ACC is falling apart or near all are eager to go, has little merit at this time; maybe that changes; maybe it does not.
g. Given the factors, I'd give the edge for selection to FSU, and next, CLEMSON. That does not rule out VPI or GT and maybe others if the circumstances change; but still think in Virginia & North Carolina, penetration could be more difficult.

In a plus one EAST and a plus one WEST model, who could come from the WEST?

a. There is TEXAS. OK, they have not wanted to be a part of the SEC, and the SEC may not be so fond of them, & the SEC already has Texas A&M. However, we know Texas can flip as Texas desires, and they are not adverse to wheeling & dealing. They are the one WEST institution that could (as opposed to would) come alone from the west.
b. A Oklahoma-OSU combo would disrupt the SEC divisions. Neither may come alone; anyway, the B12 appears stable enough. OU may still want to be wherever UT is at.
c. Kansas and/or KSU may be getting too remote and less appealing for SEC interests.
d. Houston, Rice, Tulane, SMU, and so forth.....all have factors the SEC would not embrace.

Thus;

A one EAST and one WEST addition;

FSU and TEXAS (the later being very unprobable)

A two EAST addition & shifting Mizzou (who may have something to say about it).

FSU and CLEMSON (before anyone says they are heading to the B12 which is no where near confirmed; they would not pass up an SEC offer first if given).

If FSU is unlikely gone before the SEC ever decides to further expand, there's a pool of 7 in the east. "NOs'" and too troubling complications may cut that pool down further. So, the system will play out and the real options will be cut down to an obvious two.

Taking OK and OK State wouldn't necessarily have to screw up the divisions. Move Missouri west and Alabama and Auburn East. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe the problem was so much that Auburn would have to join the East if you put Texas A&M and Missouri in the West. It was the splitting up Auburn and Alabama that was the problem. My suggestion would give you a West of: A&M, OK, OK St, LSU, Ark, Mizzou, Ole Miss and Miss St. An East of: Bama, Auburn, Vandy, Tenn, UK, SCar, Fla and UGA. This might be better for the traditional rivalries if as you maintain Tennessee-Alabama and Auburn-Georgia, especially if it is an 8 game conference schedule and you simply rotate the cross division game.

However this is all predicated on OK and OK St actually leaving the Big 12 which looks a lot less likely now than it did even 12 months ago.

hickory_cornhusker that's a good point. While it is well known Auburn & Alabama don't want to split & be cross-division rivals even permanently, less was said about both shifting east. Auburn at the time of the original divisional inception, actually prefered the east, noting traditional rivalries with GA, FLA, and Tenn. How much Alabama is bonded to the Mississippi schools and LSU in terms of willingness to shift is not real certain, as not a whole lot was reported on that as you may have implied. Mississippi State and Alabama are geographically close, and I expect the Mississippi schools & LSU would prefer to play 'Bama regularly. Maybe Arkansas (& Texas A&M) not so much, since their SEC traditions have been shorter term.

The 'Bama argument against, and perhaps a good one, is that a AU/UA split for fb, could result in them playing each other at regular season's end; & then play each other a week or two later for a conference championship game. They were not open to having the AU-UA rivalry played earlier in the season either. Another factor is that in the SEC, bb and other sports have used the established divisions for scheduling formats. So, the impact goes beyond just one sport.

The SEC recently voted to continue at 8 which includes 1 cross-over as sustained and one rotation.

If the Oklahoma schools get really dissatisfied with Texas, or Texas bolts somewhere, and the SEC decides to expand, well, who knows..... Don't see such happening, but re-alignment & expansion do have their fluid moments every so often.

Great points, SEC. With Texas A&M and Missouri in the SEC now, along with Arkansas, all of a sudden, the SEC would be a pretty nice spot for Oklahoma and Oklahoma St.

Seems like all wins for everyone with a division of:

Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., Texas A&M, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St.

* SEC nearly dominates the region at that point with only Texas and Kansas (football) as bigger brands. Sure, TCU has been great, but they're new to the Big 12...we hae to wait and see how they fit in. Might be TCU was so good because they were just outside the system (BCS) and competing against schools not of the Texas/Oklahoma type.

* OU/OSU get tied into a strong region. Surely an argument that Mississippi, MSU, TAMU, LSU, Arkansas outweigh the combined quality of Texas, TTech, newbie TCU, Kansas, Baylor, Kansas St., Iowa St.

* OU/OSU get into that SEC TV package which will be the biggest when all is said and done.

* OU no longer has to deal with the negatives of Texas, which they willingly look past because Texas helps the OU overall profile. But swap Texas w/ TAMU, Arkansas, LSU and you have the quality to keep your program strong without any of the issues, as small as they have been in reality.



Certainly does more for the SEC profile than say, doubling up in state with FSU, Clemson, GA Tech. VA Tech and NC State might do more for markets and TV money than OU/OSU though, that's something important.

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Since the SEC and Big 12 have a new alliance, I really do not see either conference raiding each other. If the SEC did want to take say Oklahoma, the school would not join until 2019 at the earliest because any of the SEC TV revenue going to Oklahoma would have to legally be paid to the Big 12.

I do not believe anyone that suggest any conference raiding the Big 12 understand the significance of sighing of Tier 1 and Tier 2 TV rights. No Big 12 school is going to leave the conference for six years and soon to be 13 years and lose all of its Tier 1 and Tier 2 TV revenue. As rich as the University of Texas is, the school could not afford to leave 20 to 25 million dollars on the table just for the sake of moving to another league.

Besides the SEC really needs two more eastern markets for 16 and those schools are more easy to acquire.

With all the issues of scheduling with 14 members, I do believe 16 is a better size.

Since I will take credit for be the first person to have suggested the four pods and a mini conference playoff, the SEC could use this type of format to work with changes in NCAA to allow semi final conference champions of pods and play into a conference championship game.

Using pods would ease a couple issues for the SEC. It would allow the conference to be more flexible in retaining old rivalries such as Auburn/Georgia, Tennessee/Alabama, etc. Secondly it would take some of the concern SEC coaches have with winning your division and having to play a stronger cross over division team compared to another team in the same division. With only four teams per pod, winning all three of those games increase the odds of winning that pod division championship as compared to having to play five or six division games and needing to win all of those games.

Either expand with Virginia/North Carolina or if those schools want to remain in a more academically aligned conference with less importance on football, SEC could expand with Va Tech/NC state.

West Pod: LSU, Arkansas, Texas A&M, Missouri

East Pod: Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina or NC State

South Pod: Alabama, Auburn, Ole Miss, Miss State

North Pod: Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Virginia or Va Tech

Each pod member plays every school each year for 3 games with 5 cross over games in against other pod teams for and 8 game conference schedule which all SEC coaches really prefer.

SEC convinces the Big 12 to expand to the Big 16 and both work together to convince the NCAA to change the regular season to allow one more week in December for the semi finals to meet in the conference championship game. This has additional benefits to not have as much lapse time for the conference champions before advancing to either the new champions bowl or the BCS final four.

Big 12/16 pods

Southwest: Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor

Southeast: Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Louisville or NC State

Northwest: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State

Northeast: Notre Dame, Iowa State, WVU, Pitt

If Notre Dame wants to remain independent then take Louisville or Maryland, or Va Tech.

It's a troubling and very sobering thought what can get complicated in super-conference creation. I suspect this was why 8-10 was the norm for much of the common era...the regionality, general like-mindedness, and competitive similarities, and ease of scheduling cemented these bonds and rivalries. In the above situation, I'd feel terrible for the Miss schools...shunted into a part of the conference where one of the older members would be...Arkansas? Eek.

If it's the ACC where the SEC further expands, it creates a north-south issue where cross-overs are risked for programs with virtually no history with SEC programs. If it's Big XII, likely the 'Okies, it stresses the Mississippi schools and LSU.

One more point on TV interest and benefit of TV pods for a suggested SEC and expanded Big 12 to 16 members.

If the plus one model is selected due to political pressure to ensure only conference champions make the playoff and to preserve the Rose Bowl, can you image the excitement of the following scenario:

SEC and Big 12/16 four pod winners meet during normal conference championship week with the winners advancing to both conference championship games a week or two weeks later. Pod could play at the highest ranked team. Or all four pods could advance to say Atlanta for a four team conference championship. Big 12/16 pods to Dallas.

Both of the conference winners advance to the Sugar Bowl (Champions Bowl) on New Year’s Day prime time.

Winner of champions bowl advance to BCS plus one championship.

Maybe this format would ease our appetite for a 8 or 16 BCS playoff which is not practical for major college football. It would preserve the bowls and keep the regular season to end by Jan 1 with the exception of the BCS championship game. At the same time provides us the fill of a true playoff situation.

Lash, I always thought you were MR ANTI-16. When did you originally propose 16 team conferences and semi-finals? I'd like to read that post to see how much "has or has not" changed since them. It would be a good read.

PS- I've been working on a SEC "4 pod" schedule that saves rivalries. You can't save them all but you can save most. Will post when I'm done. Should be a few days.

Seanbo,
Just because I am anti large conference and prefer the old school of round robin formats with 9 or 10 members, it does mean I believe that can or will be the future of college sports. Sadly it is a bygone era.

If you go way back on some of these thread, I suggested the pods format with semi final conference games this comment to Quinn which he made comments as well on the merits of the idea.

Until Quinn and I had this discussion, to my knowledge, I have never seen this discussion take place anywhere. This was for pods playing semi final conference games and not for 16 member conferences which have long been in place before with the old WAC and new Big East.

I am being objective for opinions with how the direction of college sports taking regardless if it is my preference.

Look forward to seeing your idea of pods.

Let's for argument sake Sec goes for Va Tech and NC State the ACC will go for Rutgers, UConn, UMass and either Temple or Villanova maybe Delaware if they upgrade. Louisville will jump to the Big 12.

_________________
The Bear may be dead but he still hates Tennessee. Roll Damn Tide

The ACC is not going to grab two FCS upgrades just because they lost two schools. They could even stay at 12 members if they wanted. Unless the ACC loses more members to the Big 10 they're not adding the likes of UMass and Delaware. At best they would go back to 14 with UConn and Rutgers.

SJSUfan, good point.
Can rule any FCS school out; that's desperation.
There's also Cincy, Tulane, Rice, UCF, USF, etc.---not top radar material, but beyond the unthinkable if a very unlikely scenario developed whereby the ACC had to really dip in pickins'. Leave the Villanova wrangling to the BE, that's their baby that cost them in a few ways.

The ACC is in a location whereby they could take the impact of losing a couple or so and rebound OK, depending on which schools were involved.

My personal view is that VPI and NCSU to the SEC is not happening; and if the SEC did add two eventually, neither of those two may be in the mix.

The SEC has spent major time trying to create a system to absorb Texas A&M & Mizzou into the divisional format and settle scheduling for all conference sports. The mood is to take a rest on expansion.

Quinn suggested earlier a 16 model could be better than 14. I do not disagree in a general concept, but also believe it is a circumstantial issue. So if the circumstances change a particular way, and some of it could be from external factors; then a 16-team model may one day be a preferred, viable option for the SEC.

They also have to look at issues such as revenue distribution, what other major conferences are doing, whose willing and desirable for coming onboard, TV contracts, exit fees, re-formating models, inter-conference relations, selling the idea internally, compatibilities and sponsorships in sports other than fb, etc. It can get complicated even with what may seem obvious.