Jump to content

Conference Realignment


rico
 Share

Recommended Posts

Living in Georgia with Tech grads, Georgia grads and Auburn grads in my small department. Also in my time have dealt with Florida grads and just about every SEC school grad you can name. I’ve worked with people that had athletic scholarships, or their children did, in a Half dozen of the schools. 
 

Even the Tech grads make fun of their Athletics! No thanks!

My reality, is the Auburn grads are actually better than the vaunted Tech grads!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Drroogh said:

Living in Georgia with Tech grads, Georgia grads and Auburn grads in my small department. Also in my time have dealt with Florida grads and just about every SEC school grad you can name. I’ve worked with people that had athletic scholarships, or their children did, in a Half dozen of the schools. 
 

Even the Tech grads make fun of their Athletics! No thanks!

My reality, is the Auburn grads are actually better than the vaunted Tech grads!

I do believe Ga Tech was one of the founding members of the SEC.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Reacher said:

Interesting development. I think we offer them more than they offer us. Maybe it buys some time but how solid will it be? 

Man if something like this does happen the teams remaining in the BIG 12 could be in bad spot.

Sources -- Pac-12, Big Ten, ACC in preliminary discussions about forming alliance, likely around scheduling (espn.com)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Hoosier51 said:

Man if something like this does happen the teams remaining in the BIG 12 could be in bad spot.

Sources -- Pac-12, Big Ten, ACC in preliminary discussions about forming alliance, likely around scheduling (espn.com)

I still think the Big 12 would be "OK" if they extended invitations to Cincinnati, Memphis, Houston, and perhaps a Florida school(UCF?).  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, rico said:

I still think the Big 12 would be "OK" if they extended invitations to Cincinnati, Memphis, Houston, and perhaps a Florida school(UCF?).  

They would probably be like a G5 conference, which wouldn't really be that bad for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Hoosier51 said:

They would probably be like a G5 conference, which wouldn't really be that bad for them.

I would say miles better than a G5 conference, but lacking a "blue blood" in football is a kick in the crotch.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Hoosier51 said:

Man if something like this does happen the teams remaining in the BIG 12 could be in bad spot.

Sources -- Pac-12, Big Ten, ACC in preliminary discussions about forming alliance, likely around scheduling (espn.com)

Divvie up the Big 12 between the ACC, Pac-12, and B1G, then sign an agreement saying schools will only play non-conference games against one another...

I know between the 3 they don't have the number of powerhouse football programs the SEC does, but when the SEC schools have to play the likes of Troy State and UAB to have a non-conference schedule maybe they'll think twice about trying to put a stranglehold on college sports like they're doing right now...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, IUFLA said:

Divvie up the Big 12 between the ACC, Pac-12, and B1G, then sign an agreement saying schools will only play non-conference games against one another...

I know between the 3 they don't have the number of powerhouse football programs the SEC does, but when the SEC schools have to play the likes of Troy State and UAB to have a non-conference schedule maybe they'll think twice about trying to put a stranglehold on college sports like they're doing right now...

Not sure how that will work. Florida st, Miami, GT, UL, and Clemson all have intense very very profitable rivalries with SEC schools…can’t imagine how that will work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, IUFLA said:

Divvie up the Big 12 between the ACC, Pac-12, and B1G, then sign an agreement saying schools will only play non-conference games against one another...

I know between the 3 they don't have the number of powerhouse football programs the SEC does, but when the SEC schools have to play the likes of Troy State and UAB to have a non-conference schedule maybe they'll think twice about trying to put a stranglehold on college sports like they're doing right now...

Damn straight.  Make 'Bama play the likes of Mercer and New Mexico St.....never mind.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rico said:

Damn straight.  Make 'Bama play the likes of Mercer and New Mexico St.....never mind.

I understand your point, but the other 4 conferences could do things to isolate the SEC...

With the NCAA basically getting neutered, between the bowl games and FBS, it would seem college presidents would have some options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, dgambill said:

Not sure how that will work. Florida st, Miami, GT, UL, and Clemson all have intense very very profitable rivalries with SEC schools…can’t imagine how that will work.

Understood, but new rivalries can always be made...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

I understand your point, but the other 4 conferences could do things to isolate the SEC...

With the NCAA basically getting neutered, between the bowl games and FBS, it would seem college presidents would have some options.

I understand...was just poking my usual fun at 'Bama's normal non-con scheduling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

I understand your point, but the other 4 conferences could do things to isolate the SEC...

With the NCAA basically getting neutered, between the bowl games and FBS, it would seem college presidents would have some options.

Agree with many of your points.  Step 1 should be ALL conferences MUST play the same amount of conference games. Make it mandatory to be eligible for the playoff. 

How the SEC and ESPN convince the college football world that playing a fourth, total gimme, non-conference game toward the end of the year maintains schedule strength is beyond me. It's an additional bye week to rest players and prepare for rivals. 

Therein lies the ultimate challenge; it's not the other conferences vs the SEC. The true power struggle is ESPN wanting to control ALL of college football.  The B1G told ESPN to pound sand when they created the B1G network.  Getting Fox Sports to become more aggressive could help in the isolation of the SEC and increase negotiating power.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Hoosierinbham said:

Agree with many of your points.  Step 1 should be ALL conferences MUST play the same amount of conference games. Make it mandatory to be eligible for the playoff. 

How the SEC and ESPN convince the college football world that playing a fourth, total gimme, non-conference game toward the end of the year maintains schedule strength is beyond me. It's an additional bye week to rest players and prepare for rivals. 

Therein lies the ultimate challenge; it's not the other conferences vs the SEC. The true power struggle is ESPN wanting to control ALL of college football.  The B1G told ESPN to pound sand when they created the B1G network.  Getting Fox Sports to become more aggressive could help in the isolation of the SEC and increase negotiating power.  

Yep, all about the money...

Makes you really wonder though if the powers that be at Ohio State, Michigan, USC et al would wash away over a century of tradition and brand building for a buck if the SEC offered...

Sadly, I'm almost positive they would...

Edited by IUFLA
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

Yep, all about the money...

Makes you really wonder though if the powers that be at Ohio State, Michigan, USC et al would wash away over a century of tradition and brand building for a buck if the SEC offered...

Sadly, I'm almost positive they would...

I don't think they will jump - those three combine academics and athletics as their identity.  Personally, I think there is an over reaction to this SEC thing - they took two teams from a struggling conference.  Yes, two money makers with football with an idenity, but two from a struggling conference.

B1G holds the power and the SEC is actually trying to respond to them.  Football is on the rise again in the B1G even with the likes of IU and Rutgers.  

My question is does an alliance hold the B1G back?  The research dollars and athletic dollars and shares resources only grows with growth.  Get USC, Colorado, Kansas - be America's conference spanning from east to west through the midwest.  

Have to think something is in play and B1G tight lipped.  

Personally, would love to see UCLA as the world knows that brand.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IUFLA said:

Yep, all about the money...

Makes you really wonder though if the powers that be at Ohio State, Michigan, USC et al would wash away over a century of tradition and brand building for a buck if the SEC offered...

Sadly, I'm almost positive they would...

Sorry, this just doesn't make sense. What money? Less than 1/3rd of the money OSU and UM bring in comes from TV. Maybe the SEC could increase the TV deal a little, but only maybe and only a little. BTN makes so much money because cable subscribers pay for the channel and Chicago, DC, NYC are all in Big Ten country. Just look at an electoral college map to easily see the population of these places. Illinois, PA, Ohio, MI are big, even MN, WI are all bigger than places like MS, AL, Arkansas, Louisiana. The numbers just aren't there. And, even more importantly, BIG schools have huge alumni bases. The SEC is better at football, but they can't compete with those numbers. The schools are smaller and the cities are smaller. Plus, Michigan would be mediocre, at best, if they have to compete weekly in the SEC. They know it and don't want it. They benefit from being in a conference with large schools that are only okay at football. Smaller schools that are better at football is a minus, not a plus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, HoosierDom said:

Sorry, this just doesn't make sense. What money? Less than 1/3rd of the money OSU and UM bring in comes from TV. Maybe the SEC could increase the TV deal a little, but only maybe and only a little. BTN makes so much money because cable subscribers pay for the channel and Chicago, DC, NYC are all in Big Ten country. Just look at an electoral college map to easily see the population of these places. Illinois, PA, Ohio, MI are big, even MN, WI are all bigger than places like MS, AL, Arkansas, Louisiana. The numbers just aren't there. And, even more importantly, BIG schools have huge alumni bases. The SEC is better at football, but they can't compete with those numbers. The schools are smaller and the cities are smaller. Plus, Michigan would be mediocre, at best, if they have to compete weekly in the SEC. They know it and don't want it. They benefit from being in a conference with large schools that are only okay at football. Smaller schools that are better at football is a minus, not a plus.

lately, Michigan is mediocre in the B1G

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, HoosierDom said:

Sorry, this just doesn't make sense. What money? Less than 1/3rd of the money OSU and UM bring in comes from TV. Maybe the SEC could increase the TV deal a little, but only maybe and only a little. BTN makes so much money because cable subscribers pay for the channel and Chicago, DC, NYC are all in Big Ten country. Just look at an electoral college map to easily see the population of these places. Illinois, PA, Ohio, MI are big, even MN, WI are all bigger than places like MS, AL, Arkansas, Louisiana. The numbers just aren't there. And, even more importantly, BIG schools have huge alumni bases. The SEC is better at football, but they can't compete with those numbers. The schools are smaller and the cities are smaller. Plus, Michigan would be mediocre, at best, if they have to compete weekly in the SEC. They know it and don't want it. They benefit from being in a conference with large schools that are only okay at football. Smaller schools that are better at football is a minus, not a plus.

It's not like I'm making it up out of thin air 

I'm sure a few years ago people who preside over the Big 12 wouldn't have believed UT and OU would leave them either...and Texas is the top revenue producing football program in the NCAA (Oklahoma was in at #8) and has been for a while...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

It's not like I'm making it up out of thin air 

I'm sure a few years ago people who preside over the Big 12 wouldn't have believed UT and OU would leave them either...and Texas is the top revenue producing football program in the NCAA (Oklahoma was in at #8) and has been for a while...

 

But the Big Ten is not the Big Twelve. Just look at an electoral map to make the numbers easy to see. Texas DOMINATES the Big 12, no other state is even close. So the Big 12 just doesn't offer much. The Big Ten has a lot more people and they are a lot more spread out. Big schools that are only okay at football: that's the dream every top team wants to fill their conference with and the BIG is loaded with them. No one wants to give that up. Texas wasn't getting much from the Big 12 and they were running a real risk of falling behind A&M. Michigan and OSU don't have that same kind of pressure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, HoosierDom said:

Big schools that are only okay at football: that's the dream every top team wants to fill their conference with

Not sure I understand that statement...

If you're insinuating that UT and OU are "only ok at football" I'd say you're off base there. The fertile recruiting grounds of Texas can by itself turn a program, all it takes is the right coach (and for the record, I don't believe Sarkasian is it either).

If you're insinuating that Michigan and OSU are happy being the 2 biggest fish in a big pond, that may have some legs to it...but you have to admit for bottom line purposes a schedule that might feature UGA, Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn, UT, Oklahoma, Florida, not to mention FSU and Clemson if the article I cited was correct, beats the crap out of anything the B1G could muster up...

Again, I didn't make up the scenario...I simply provided a link to a credible source (SI) that said there have been talks...my gut tells me it'd take a sweetheart of a deal to get UM and OSU to move, but the B1G isn't huddling up with the other conferences for nothing...

Edited by IUFLA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

Not sure I understand that statement...

If you're insinuating that UT and OU are "only ok at football" I'd say you're off base there. The fertile recruiting grounds of Texas can by itself turn a program, all it takes is the right coach (and for the record, I don't believe Sarkasian is it either).

If you're insinuating that Michigan and OSU are happy being the 2 biggest fish in a big pond, that may have some legs to it...but you have to admit for bottom line purposes a schedule that might feature UGA, Tennessee, Alabama, Auburn, UT, Oklahoma, Florida, not to mention FSU and Clemson if the article I cited was correct, beats the crap out of anything the B1G could muster up...

Again, I didn't make up the scenario...I simply provided a link to a credible source (SI) that said there have been talks...my gut tells me it'd take a sweetheart of a deal to get UM and OSU to move, but the B1G isn't huddling up with the other conferences for nothing...

Yes, I mean the second thing. UM and OSU have everything they could ever ask for here: they don't want to move. 

If Michigan wanted to have a killer schedule, they could easily schedule 4 powerhouse non-conference games. But, that isn't what they, or anyone else, is looking for. I think that's a big part of what a lot of the conversation in this thread is missing. Top schools don't want a loaded schedule. The unmistakable proof of that is that no school goes out and loads up their non-conference schedule. They still sell our their 100k stadiums when they play Northern Michigan, so they want the wins and good times that come along with that. They need some big games, but the BIG provides enough of those. If it ever stops doing that, you go get those games in the non-conference.

To me, that SI article is akin to saying Chipotle is trying to hire Nick Saban because he saw a help wanted sign when he went to get his burrito. I'm sure they would love him, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense from his point of view. As I've said before, I think the only thing the SEC could offer that would truly entice UM and OSU is if they are making a move to abandon the NCAA and run their own thing as they see fit, but with the NIL, I think that is far less likely.

The only things I have seen about this conference huddling up are vague terms of cooperation that make it seem like they're not even talking about doing anything of substance, so what they end up agreeing to will likely be close to nothing. But, the articles I've seen are so unclear that it's hard to read the situation precisely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HoosierDom said:

Top schools don't want a loaded schedule.

Then why would Texas and OU move to the SEC? You're gonna get a "loaded schedule" whether you want it or not. UT and OU were the two big fish in a big pond. What would entice them to move? And I don't think losing ground to A&M had anything to do with it. There's enough money and recruits in this state for both...easily...

They'd both have a much easier road to the football playoffs in the Big 12, no? 

Regardless, I think if the B1G, ACC, and Pac-12 stand pat, they'll regret it down the road. The SEC has no qualms about playing beneath the table. Never have...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...