Four Things You Need to Know About Texas A&M's (Apparently) Impending Move to the SEC
The first thing you need to know is that it’s all Texas A&M’s fault. We know that, because the Texas Longhorns told us so. The Aggies are breaking up the Big 12 that the Burnt Orange tried to save; it’s silly to suggest that the ‘Horns are using the depleted league as a mere way station to independence. Why, whatever would’ve given you that idea? I mean, besides the fact that they got ESPN to give them their own network and are threatening to dump the Aggies from the schedule in favor of traditional independent Notre Dame. Those are mere coincidences. I know because Chip Brown told me so, though I haven’t yet ruled out the possibility that Brown is really just DeLoss Dodds’s hand-puppet.
Who can blame Texas for ditching Texas A&M as a year-end rival? Didn’t you know that, if an SEC team has an out-of-conference in-state rival, they’re not allowed to play one another? You know, unless you count the one-third of the existing members of the SEC who play annual games against out-of-conference in-state rivals. (To be fair, I should be clear here that I think highly enough of the Longhorns to believe they are lying when they claim they would cancel the season-ending series if the Aggies left the Big 12. Non-conference rivalries are nothing new for a Texas club that for many years competed in the Southwest Conference while yearly facing the Big Eight’s Oklahoma Sooners. I doubt seriously that the ‘Horns are anywhere near a big enough bunch of crybabies to be sincere.)
The second thing you need to know is that, even though the first thing you need to know is complete crap, it isn’t all the SEC’s fault. No, really. Mike Slive has gone to great pains to make sure this is so, though the Aggies have attempted to split the baby a bit more than Slive probably would’ve preferred.
The (evidently entirely accurate) impression we were given when the runaway freight train of conference expansion came to a screeching halt a week and a half ago was that the SEC wasn’t willing to propose until the Aggies’ divorce from the Big 12 was finalized. Instead, Texas A&M merely told its rickety present conference that it wanted to date outside the marriage. If the Big 12 indicates the circumstances under which the league would allow the Aggies to see other people, will an open relationship work?
Actually, it might. In essence, the Aggies have asked, "What would it take for us to skedaddle without getting sued?" If the Big 12 gives an answer that sets forth reasonable procedures in a clear manner, Texas A&M will know the precise set of hoops through which it must jump; if the league declines to respond or makes outrageous demands, it will be clear from a public relations standpoint, and clearer from a legal standpoint, which side is, and which is not, operating in good faith.
Yes, this is all smoke screen; the parties are engaging in the pretense of playing "Mother, May I" when we all know damned good and well what everyone ultimately is going to do when push comes to shove. However, in one carefully-crafted sentence ("We would appreciate your conferring with the other member institutions and outlining for us the process to be followed by Texas A&M should it withdraw from the Conference"; capitalizing "conference" made this a masterpiece of lawyerly draftsmanship), the Aggies used their engineering acumen to erect the canopy under which they will be free to flee, and through which the SEC will be able to accept them with the protection the league requires. Now Slive will be able to claim convincingly at a deposition that he took in a fleeing refugee carrying a Nansen passport, which sounds significantly nobler than confessing to a seduction, though the value of the accompanying television markets would be identical, either way.
The third thing you need to know is that it ain’t over yet, and likely won’t be for a while. The Aggies were always the one prize on which every existing SEC member could agree; battles very well may be brewing over the likes of Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, and Missouri, but opposition to Texas A&M is tepid, if it exists at all. That reality produces this one: It is entirely plausible, perhaps even probable, that the Aggies will be invited to join the SEC prior to the end of August---prior to the start of the season---and that the league will stay put at thirteen members through January. Oh, there will be a "study committee" or a "presidents’ commission" or an "exploratory council" or some such, but, because finding a suitable 14th member (or suitable 14th, 15th, and 16th members) would be doable as a relatively long-term proposition, and because no team would want the distraction during the fall, it’s altogether likely that we will know the Aggies are coming to dinner well before we we will know who will be sitting opposite them once the extra table leaves have been added.
The fourth and final thing you need to know is that, if Texas A&M plans on doing a one-year farewell tour of the Big 12 in 2011 before joining the SEC effective in 2012, I’m going to start eyeing the Bulldogs’ 2013 schedule warily. If our conference expands, I want Clemson to be one of the new teams, even though I understand and freely concede all the sensible arguments against the Tigers’ admission. I’d love to see Georgia’s dates with the Jungaleers in 2013 and 2014 be SEC East showdowns, but, if the Country Gentlemen aren’t among the invitees, and the expansion of the league slate causes the cancellation of a scheduled series to which I have been looking forward quite literally for years, I’m going to be ticked!
Go ‘Dawgs!
54 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Nice summary of it all
The Big XII – 2 situation is what it is, which is why we’re left with the circling and posturing at this point. I like your theory on sitting on thirteen members, although I wonder if the schedule for rounding things up might be hurried by another conference assessing the situation, and deciding to move early.
In your opinion, why do you think this has taken so long? Accounting for the inevitable delays, stalling, and “oh-no-you-don’t, -Aggie-you-belong-to-me-FOREVER-you-worthless-piece-of-shit-that-I-can’t-bear-the-very-sight-of” deathgrip of UT…why did they wait so long?
Fair question, AU Tiger.
I think it’s primarily a matter of the legalities of it. There was a lot of wrangling over Colorado’s and (particularly) Nebraska’s departures from the Big 12; who owed what, to whom it would be paid, &c. I think Mike Slive is trying to ensure that the SEC doesn’t get sued, and Texas A&M is trying to make the break as cleanly as possible without putting itself in the position of being without a conference affiliation. Both positions are understandable.
In short, anytime lawyers get involved, it takes longer. :)
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Aug 26, 2011 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Good answer
And that was what my cursory take on it was (I must admit to not being as enthralled and excited about conference expansion as everyone else).
Again, thanks for the assessment of this — it’s better than the speculative stuff that makes up most of the discussion.
In short, anytime lawyers get involved, it takes longer.
Tell me about it. It’s made a few of my fanposts sheer hell.
(/kidding)
and considerably less concise.
"One thing I will never do as long as I’m at Georgia is lose to Florida." - Herschel Walker
Here's something else to ponder, AU Tiger.
Last year A&M could have walked away clean like Nebraska did. But they got cold feet or were woo’d back by UT. Just think, if they would have done this a year ago, when they should have, we would actually be talking about football right now.
True
As I was responding to TKK, the whole Texas legislature mess came back to mind, and that’s probably had as much to do with it as anything else.
Still, for as unhappy as they’ve been about the arrangement of things, I’m surprised that they didn’t plan for / expect that to happen.
On the bright side for A&M, at least they get one last (apparent) shot at trying to win their conference without a championship game. It’s a tougher row to hoe in the SEC.
Your final point is a key one for Georgia fans.
If the SEC expands the slate will likely be changed to 9 conference games. Due to that factor, it’s very unlikely that Georgia would be scheduling any major out-of-conference games again anytime soon*. If one of the expansion teams is not Clemson, then this would effectively mean the end of the Georgia-Clemson rivalry.
* – No, I’m not counting Tech. I said major out-of-conference games.
it makes sense to go to 9
bit I think they’ll end up sticking with 8. Unless of course a new tv deal is dependent on a 9 game schedule.
by Mark Mandingo on Aug 26, 2011 9:47 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Aren't the Big 10+2 and Pac-12
Both going to have 9-game conference schedules with just 12 teams? We’d probably have to go to 9 if we add 2, and definitely if 4, more teams…
by commodore_dude on Aug 26, 2011 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions
i don't know about the big 12
But the pac 10 went to nine games when the regular season was expanded to 12 games. They were obsessed with a round robin schedule.
by Mark Mandingo on Aug 26, 2011 10:16 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
Big Ten is going to 9 in 2017 (this has been announced)
There was some discussion of going back to 8 in the Pac 12 when expansion made a round-robin schedule impossible, but ultimately the non-LA schools wanted to play in LA more often.
The Big 12 Texas 10 9 went to a 9-game schedule after Nebraska and Colorado left; this season is their first year with a 9-game schedule.
If this conference roulette settles down and we northeastern types can figure who to make Big East football member #10 (we’re praying that either the ACC or Big 12 is badly damaged enough that some of their schools think heading our way would be a good idea, without setting off mega-conferences all over), we’ll probably go to 9 conference games shortly after TCU finally made it possible to have 8.
thanks for the info
I didn’t know about the big 10. And for what its worth, here’s Tony B’s thoughts on it.
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/15422164/sec-acc-not-going-to-nine-conference-games-any-time-soon
by Mark Mandingo on Aug 26, 2011 10:44 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I don't see how the scheduling can't get fouled up
If you add an additional team to each division, you have to add an additional conference game to maintain status quo. To stay at 8, you’d have to either not play every team in your division each year, stick with only your traditional rivalry each year, or drop the traditional rivalry and go to strictly round-robin with the other division.
I don’t like the idea of not playing one of the teams in your division – it opens the door for controversy when determining the division champ when you have 2 teams with equal records and no head-to-head tiebreaker. It also makes each SEC division the equivalent of the old Big-10, at least in my mind.
Playing only your protected rival from the other division opens the door for inter-division controversy and would clearly give some schools an advantage (looking at you, Mississippi brethren).
Dropping the traditional rivals is just unacceptable in the SEC. Going more than a decade without squaring off with Auburn? That just won’t work. Like, at all.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not opposed to conference expansion. But with McGarity bringing Foley’s playbook to Athens, you won’t be seeing many BSU/Clemson/OSU types on the schedule unless the NCAA adds another game to the schedule.
by Just Some Dawg on Aug 26, 2011 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Why?
Because we must play at least two cupcakes a year (excluding Tech)?
If we played 9 SEC games and GT, that would leave 2 open slots to play whichever teams we want. Unless I’m unaware of a mandatory 2 cupcake rule, which would then necessitate how to determine what is and is not a cupcake (see: GT some years), I don’t see the harm.
I agree, in most years, UGA may elect to play the Coastal Carolinas and the New Mexico States of the world, but in other years they may decide to play only one cupcake. Thus, Clemson could (and should) still be on the schedule.
"Don't go ninja'n nobody that don't need ninja'n!" ~ Kung Fu Hillbilly.
The answer to your question, Jman781, is the same answer to the question of why any of this change is happening at all...
… and that is money.
Georgia wants to be guaranteed at least 6 home games a year, and preferably 7. If you play an 8 game conference schedule, then you would normally have 4 home games and 4 away games every year, leaving 4 additional games to schedule at your leisure.
In Georgia’s case, however, one of those non-conference games is always against Tech, which is an away game every other year, and one of our conference games is in Jacksonville every year. This means that, in some years, we have only 3 conference home games, and in some years (like this year), we only have 3 conference away games. We pair our away game against Tech with the years in which we have 3 conference away games, so we have 3 slots to fill with, ostensibly home games.
In order to maintain 6 home games, we have to fill 2 of those slots with cupcakes, and the third slot is available for a home-and-away series with a big non-conference opponent. (This year, that slot is taken up by Boise State, and in 2013 and 2014, by Clemson.)
If the SEC moves to a 9-game schedule, that takes away the slot for premier non-conference games, leaving us only two slots, both of which need to be filled with cupcakes to ensure 6 or 7 home games for the University. (And it doesn’t help that the “third slot” will now always be filled with another SEC team, and you want to give your own team at least a few easy weeks during the season.)
by vineyarddawg on Aug 26, 2011 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I am not following.
I get what you’re saying regarding home games, but a home-and-away series, by its very nature, includes a home game.
Thus, why couldn’t we simply alternate the Clemson series, for example, with the GT series? Meaning, in the years we play GT away, we would play Clemson, or similar team, at home? Wouldn’t the net home games be the same? Who cares if we play Clemson or Coastal Carolina?
For example, in 2013 we’re slated to play both at GT and at Clemson. We currently only have 6 home games: 2 cupcakes, Auburn, South Carolina, Alabama and Kentucky.
Thus, if we added an SEC team, why couldn’t we (a) play said team at home thus replacing either cupcake or (b) play the SEC team away and play Clemson at home (ignoring the scheduling problems for Clemson)?
It’s pretty simple to figure out when to schedule a home-and-away series. I’m simply not following the problem. Sorry.
Also, we make enough money off the Florida game that you shouldn’t count that game against us. If we were routinely losing money on that game, we wouldn’t continue to play down there.
"Don't go ninja'n nobody that don't need ninja'n!" ~ Kung Fu Hillbilly.
It's the "when" that makes it hard..
..to schedule the higher-tiered home-and-home series. You have to take Clemson’s (as an example) scheduling into account, and their desire to achieve the same goal vis-a-vis home games. The New Mexico States of the world don’t have the same demanding fanbase and alumni to appease, so they can be counted upon to play a one-time road game for a payoff. So once in a good while we’ll have the opportunity to schedule home-home series with that caliber but the norm will remain schools that will take a beating for a payoff. Further muddying the waters are that the aforementioned scheduled-in-advanced games can get cancelled at the last minute (didn’t we do just that to accommodate the CFA game? I dont recall, honestly) and you have to find a patsy on short notice…
With regard to our number of home games and money, it’s not JUST about money. Recruiting visits often coincide with home games. Correct me if I’m wrong, but we aren’t allowed to officially invite teams to Jacksonville are we? Adding the CFA, we need all the home games we can get.
by Just Some Dawg on Aug 26, 2011 1:42 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
That make sense.
Most of the time, we’ll play cupcakes, for they make the most logistical and economic sense and provide for the occassional seventh home game. I get it.
But this statement is false:
If one of the expansion teams is not Clemson, then this would effectively mean the end of the Georgia-Clemson rivalry.
I do agree. This would mean the end of playing random teams like Colorado or Arizona State, but, while difficult to schedule, it’s not impossible to have the occassional home-and-away series with a rival like Clemson. I’m not advocating playing Clemson each season, but once every eight years or so does not seem like a problem, at least not to me.
Also, this assumes the SEC stops at 14 teams. If the SEC eventually expands to 16, which I believe it will, then the schedule will need to be completely revamped. Who knows what happens with two, eight-team divisions?
"Don't go ninja'n nobody that don't need ninja'n!" ~ Kung Fu Hillbilly.
16-team conferences are whole different story
I agree that you’ll see 2 8-team conferences (that’s what’s logical, anyway) but then you’re right back in the situation with not playing all your division members or slow rotation with the other division. The only other option I see there is to go to a 10- or 11-game conference schedule. Teams that have a traditional rival out of conference will have to choose between that game or the tradition.
To me, that’s going to make the schedule kind of stale unless they get into a 13- or 14-game regular season, which will meet all kinds of hate and discontent (the “what-about-final-exams” group, the “what-about-increased-player-injury” group, etc). Due to the money involved, I think it would probably meet with approval from most schools’ administration, at least until they started having mass academic casualties. And similar to the argument about the NFL’s 18-game schedule, I believe rosters would have to be expanded to offset extra injuries which would likely increase the number of scholarships, too.
Oddly, the one group that would stand to benefit the most from this is the one that would probably kill it – the NCAA. Say the SEC, B1G, ACC and Pac-12 all expand to 16 teams. That’s 64 of the potentially best teams in the country in 4 conferences. It’s not a far reach that they get miffed at the NCAA over any little thing (TV, revenue sharing, rules and violations, the BCS, etc) and break away. Or conversely, that they wield so much power that members of other conferences get fed up and do the same.
I think the SEC will be the next “experiment” with conference expansion when they inevitably go to 14 teams. It that doesn’t go absolutely perfect, I can see the NCAA putting the kibosh on another conference going to 16 teams.
by Just Some Dawg on Aug 26, 2011 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions
In general I'm not crazy about "mega conferences"
but it seems inevitable, so the TV revenue of A&M is probably worth it. Now obviously the other team/s to add are critical. I sort of hope it is more along the lines of Clemson/VT/FSU rather than Missouri/Oklahoma/etc. Keep things in the actual “East”
ain't nothin' finer in the land,
than a drunk, obnoxious georgia fan!
-based on my behavior after the 07 Sugar Bowl my girlfriend disagrees with this statement
-based on my behavior after the 09 LSU game, I'm lucky to still have said girlfriend
by Dawg in Beaumont on Aug 26, 2011 9:35 AM EDT reply actions
why did they wait so long?
As an Aggie, all I can say is “it’s complicated.” The desires of a rabid fanbase to seek membership in America’s greatest Conference don’t quickly translate into the desires of college bureaucrats and administrators.
Last year, A&M sought the SEC because Texas was trying to package 1/2 the Big XII up and go to the PAC. (And wouldn’t that be a sweet move when they later declared independence, and every Texas school was stuck playing two time zones away on the West Coast. Goodbye, recruiting.) Anyways, A&M pushed back, talked to Commissioner Slive, and built a relationship. But leaving last year, when the Big XII didn’t dissolve, was simply too much, too soon. Baylor (and to a lesser extent, Texas Tech) know that A&M leaving the Big XII could be the death knell for their BCS AQ membership, and they’ve been fighting like wounded, cornered animals.
But A&M is marching on. Sorry it took a year longer than it should have, but it really has been a complicated process. And it’s not over.
It's obviously inevitable at this point
That A&M will be joining the conference, with them putting out the statement the other day I see that being in the near future. This seemed like a step of good faith that the SEC had been requiring them to do. I’m still neutral on how I think this will impact the SEC. On the one hand, it opens up new media markets and more revenue for schools via new TV deals, as well as Texas recruits being exposed to the SEC. On the other hand, I’m not sure how I feel about A&M as a school. No offense to the A&M fan that just posted above.
if its academics
you’re worried about, they’re on par with UGA and fl, and like Fla they’re an aau school. The no cheerleader thing really weirds me out though. So I have cultural concerns.
by Mark Mandingo on Aug 26, 2011 11:21 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
As a school...
On the other hand, I’m not sure how I feel about A&M as a school.
I thought he was referring to the cadets, the chant/hymn, those kinds of things. What Texas refers to as the “cult-like” behavior.
With that said, I fully recognize the irony of me pointing that out, being: 1) an Auburn fan; and 2) an Alabama resident. If you’ll pardon me, I’m off to the mass “all in” chant that takes place here at lunchtime every day (think like Hate Hour in 1984).
by AU Tiger on Aug 26, 2011 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
They do have a lot of strange traditions
That’s what I’m mainly referring to. They’re more like cowboys there, and SEC is not really that.. I’m sure it’ll be fine though.
The SEC is about to own . . .
. . . women’s equestrian.
Hunt seat equitation on the flat FTW!
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Aug 26, 2011 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions
See
Now there’s a positive.
While I have a hard time believing that A&M will succeed any more than they do in the Big 12, it’s helpful in some aspects to the other member institutions. I guess what they have to gain is more exposure on TV, potentially more recruits from SEC states, and to get out of UT’s shadow.
There is one HUGE reason that Georgia alums should be thrilled A&M could be going to the SEC
It’s three little letters. AAU. The football and athletics aside (BTW, A&M has been a consistent Top 10 school in the Sears Cup, we are a Top 25 team in every sport except Volleyball) A&M brings something of great value to the University of Georgia. We are members of the AAU along with Florida and Vandy. Georgia is a solid academic institution that has been trying to get in the AAU for years because it is THE definition of being a Tier 1 University. AAU membership increases the value of every person that has a Degree from Georgia significantly. Getting in the AAU is like pledging a fraternity, you have to get voted in by the current members. A&M can help with that (especially teaming with Florida and Vandy), it’s a highly political process. We bring a lot to the table with our nearly $6 billion research endowment which is the 4th largest of any public school and double that of Vandy (almost 6 times UGA). We have some influence many of you may not realize and a very real possibility of even having the next President of the US as a vocal alumni.
LSU also has an application in to the AAU to boot. If over the next decade the SEC was able to increase the AAU membership with those schools (plus maybe another AAU member like Missouri) it will go a long way toward the national reputation of the conference as being a lot more than just a great football conference. Think big my friends. It’s about more than just football and money, though those things are certainly the meat of the conversation.
by aggie93 on Aug 26, 2011 12:24 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Thanks, aggie93.
That’s a very valid point. It irks me a little that Georgia isn’t in the AAU (largely because the medical school is in Augusta and the engineering school is in Atlanta), and it would be nice if Texas A&M could help us rectify that.
Go 'Dawgs!
by T Kyle King on Aug 26, 2011 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions
And the Football School is in Five Points!
/GeorgiaState’d
"If there's one thing worse than chlamydia, it's Florida." ~ Emma Stone
by RedCrake on Aug 26, 2011 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Isn't the med school in the process of moving to Athens?
Or maybe already has? We had some kind of med school open its doors last year.
The 984 Has Spoken!
You are correct.
I think, but do not know, it is sort of a joint University of Georgia-Medical College of Georgia effort, but I could be quite wrong upon that point.
I believe this move is calculated, at least partly, to get Georgia into the AAU, because the lack of a medical or engineering school in Athens unquestionably has hurt Georgia’s bid for membership before.
Go 'Dawgs!
No, it is not
it’s expanding, and I think there is some new teaching in Athens, but “moving” would be the incorrect word to use. The medical college is not leaving Augusta.
http://sportsandgrits.blogspot.com/
I just hit upon a realization:
If conference expansion is “Talladega Nights,” then the SEC is Ricky Bobby, Texas is Leslie Bibb, and Texas A&M is Amy Adams.
Go 'Dawgs!
Damn A&M is sexy!
"If there's one thing worse than chlamydia, it's Florida." ~ Emma Stone
by RedCrake on Aug 26, 2011 9:13 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I'd like you to meet my sons:
“I” and “hate Florida.”
by vineyarddawg on Aug 27, 2011 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
about that AAU membership
A&M recently got a nastygram from the AAU that if they continue down the path if decisions they’ve been making recently, A&M could find their AAU membership nullified, just as happened to Nebraska this year. The newest member of the B1G is the only one not an AAU member.
by sessamoid on Aug 27, 2011 3:05 AM EDT via iPhone app reply actions
The nastygram is a non issue
That was essentially a bit of a tiff between the former Chancellor of the A&M System (not Loftin, who is the Pres of A&M College Station) and the Pres of the AAU (who used to be the Pres of Univ of Texas btw). He was gone shortly afterward. Also realize the A&M system includes dozens of other colleges in Texas (West Texas A&M, Texas A&M Kingsville, Prairie View A&M, etc.). A&M is simply too big now to lose it’s AAU membership because it is all about Research and especially research funding. A&M has the 4th largest Research Endowment of any public school and is 14th overall. A&M is the ONLY school in the US that has a Land Grant, Sea Grant, and Space Grant. More than that, A&M is continuing to grow in research funding and we have added an on campus Medical school.
The schools that are in danger of losing AAU membership are some of the older schools that joined 50 or more years ago but simply haven’t kept up.
The question is do we damage the ACC?
I’d assume the Pac 12 is already making it’s solicitations for the Okie schools, maybe Kansas too. So the fall out from the SEC going over 12 will force the Pac 12, Big 10, and maybe Big East to alter. I could see us attacking the ACC, and it allowing the NCAA to drop a complete death hammer on Miami without fear of destroying a crucial program for a major conference leading to it’s demise (as it did with SMU/SWC). If the ACC is already going under, then there wouldn’t be collateral damage from dumping Miami.
http://sportsandgrits.blogspot.com/
Texas A&M to SEC
Rumor has it that you’d like to adopt our little brother. If you feel that strongly then we won’t stand in your way. But first, I feel compelled to inform you of what you’re getting yourself into.
Have you ever heard the Patton Theme Song 587 times?
How do you feel about excessive and senseless rituals regarded as “Sacred tradition”?
What’s your position on one championship in 15 years?
How do you feel about jealousy (and I mean a deep green jealousy)?
Well, you’ll need to get real familiar with these things if you are going to bring them into your family. We’ve been dealing with them for a long time in ours.
I recommend you think this through and if you still want them we’ll let you have ‘em. But I’m gonna tell you now, it ain’t gonna be pretty. Hope you enjoy the helmet heads.
Whatever dude
I was there, live and in person, at the bowl. We killed AM. But they sure treated us good and right and I had more fun at an opponents prep rally than ever.
You can’t stand it that your “little brother” is smart enough to go big.
It’s about to be very lonely. Ask ND.
"One thing I will never do as long as I’m at Georgia is lose to Florida." - Herschel Walker
587 times?
Dude, the Tennessee band plays Rocky Top that many times every quarter.
by vineyarddawg on Aug 27, 2011 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
How do I feel about excessive and senseless rituals regarded as sacred tradition?
Dude, have you met me?
Go 'Dawgs!
Not the End of the Road...
Gents,
This is by no means the end all be all of conference restructuring. All signs point to future "Super Conferences" being built, and the Big XII not being one of them. It is not so farfetched to believe that TAMU, UT, and TTU could all be reunited in the SEC. It could look something like what Pete Fiutak writes about in: http://cfn.scout.com/2/1095821.html
The SEC
East
Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Virginia Tech
West
Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Texas, Texas Tech, Texas
The Pac-18
North
Boise State, California, Kansas, Kansas State, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
South
Arizona, Arizona State, BYU, Colorado, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, UCLA, USC, Utah
As much as some of older fans loved the ol’ SWC, Baylor, Rice, and SMU will likely be relegated to be smaller sub conference consisting of academic minded mid-major programs like Tulane, University of San Diego, and whoever else you can think you can bring into the fold. At least you’ll be able to say that you’re smarter than other conferences, and have decent baseball programs.
Won't happen.
Texas won’t join the SEC, and the SEC wouldn’t invite Texas Tech to join. Both ideas are complete non-starters, one from the prospective invitee’s side and one from the expanding conference’s side.
Superconferences likely are coming, but the Longhorns are positioning themselves for independence, and Lubbock is not on the SEC’s radar screen.
Go 'Dawgs!
Have you read the interwebs? Logic and sense are no needed.
"One thing I will never do as long as I’m at Georgia is lose to Florida." - Herschel Walker
Yet...
If UT thinks it can compete against the teams of the Dirty South, and they do; and if the money the PAC offers is comprable to what the SEC offers, it would not be suprising to see them join, and Tech is joined at their hip. Tech may not be on the SEC’s radar right now, but when the rush to form super conferences commences, it may be a different story. Tech may be located in Lubbock, but given their strong alumni base in El Paso and West Texas (a population exceeding the SEC’s largest city, Atlanta) Tech coming in with UT to keep the numbers even remains a possibility. You want UT. When A&M joins, it will be the largest University in the conference with the largest endowment. UT is even bigger, with even more money in its coffers.
Orrrr, you go for the OU and OSU package. One of those pairs will be welcomed into the SEC and all of its glorious traditions before all is said and done when the super conferences form.
I know I’d rather road trip to the East where people are still decent than fly out West to the land of fruits and nuts i.e. California and Oregon.
Oklahoma/Oklahoma State is a possibility, though even that is remote . . .
. . . because the SEC doesn’t want Oklahoma State, and probably doesn’t want Oklahoma badly enough to be willing to agree to a package deal.
For opposite reasons, Texas and Texas Tech are complete non-starters. The Longhorns want no part of joining the SEC, and the SEC wants no part of admitting Texas Tech. I’m telling you, those prospects simply are not on the table.
Go 'Dawgs!
this makes me kinda sad
if only because it means less opportunities to play host to y’all at my place which means less times y’all will bring me real bbq.
I can bake like a demon.
You do not want Texas Tech and Texas is not coming
Tech is in Texas, yes, but it is not in the right part of the state. You have to remember just how big Texas is and how far out Lubbock is from the main population centers. DFW and Houston are Top 10 markets but they are 350 and 530 miles away from Lubbock. El Paso is also not a great market but is 350 miles away from Lubbock. Lubbock itself is the 142nd largest market and it is certainly not growing or wealthy.
By comparison, A&M is in the middle of the prime media markets. College Station is 60 miles from Houston, 150 miles from Dallas, 90 miles from Austin, and 150 miles from San Antonio. There are also almost as many people in College Station/Bryan as Lubbock.
More importantly, Tech has no chance of competing. They don’t have big money. They are a Tier 4 school academically. They have a horrible stadium that is small (60k) and they can’t come close to filling it unless they play A&M or Texas (you can buy season tickets for $99). They also don’t compete well in other sports. A&M beat Tech in all 18 sports they mutually play in last year. All 18.
Texas isn’t going to go to the SEC for a number of reasons. They have never had any interest in being in a league with equal rules, that’s why they are in the process of killing their second conference. They also don’t fit culturally with the SEC and they look down on the SEC as beneath them. If they join a conference it will be Pac 12 or Big 1G but they are likely going Indy. As a final nail, A&M is almost certainly to join the club with Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina and vote to keep any other Texas schools out of the SEC. It’s a huge advantage for us and a major selling point of the SEC to be the only Texas school.
by aggie93 on Aug 28, 2011 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

by 































