Big 10 Expansion Thread -Big Ten ready for a playoff .. finally?

[Toddzilla]

Yep, that's why VT gave the BigEast a big "Fuck You" when they left for greener pastures.

[General Mike]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

missing out on that CBS contract,

The Big East did have a contract with CBS for football from 1996 to 2000. Not sure how long the Big East's basketball deal goes with CBS, but I'm guessing it goes back to the same time.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by General Mike

Not sure how long the Big East's basketball deal goes with CBS, but I'm guessing it goes back to the same time.

From a 2006 press release

The BIG EAST Conference and CBS Sports have reached a multi-year agreement, which extends the network’s rights to telecast BIG EAST basketball games through the 2012-13 season, it was announced today by BIG EAST Commissioner Michael Tranghese and Mike Aresco, Senior Vice President, Programming of CBS Sports.

The new agreement, which will begin with the 2007-08 season, will call for a minimum of 14 men’s basketball appearances per season by BIG EAST schools. ... The BIG EAST and CBS have been long-time television partners. CBS began telecasting games involving BIG EAST teams in 1981-82, the third year of the conference’s existence. The BIG EAST enjoyed a rapid ascent on the national college basketball scene in the early eighties and the league became the first conference to sign an exclusive agreement with a television network, forging a deal with CBS in 1985.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Another update over on Tigerboard. Some info on where certain B12 teams may land. Says that Mizzou will let B12 know they are pursuing other options 2-3 days after A&M leaves.

Mondo (TX state rep) still says Sept. 2nd or 6th for aTm final announcement. SEC vote will be unanimous, although LSU and at least one other school would vote no if there was enough support to not add aTm.

Expect MU to notify the B12 that they will be exploring their options on the second or third day following the SEC "vote" to invite aTm.

The talk of adding ND or BYU is just Beebe face saving, ND has already said no to Dodds and BYU is content with their status right now, i.e. they want major guarantees to join.

Look for Houston to be the first replacement followed by SMU when MU goes.

The Pac 12 will move as soon as MU announces their move and, thank goodness, this cluster will come to an end with TT making the Pac 12 cut along with OU, OSU and KS.

Good luck guys, I probably won't have anything else to post now that this is coming to a close. Adios.

[MrBug708]

I like that people think know what Larry Scott is going to do. I dont think Larry Scott even knows what he is going to do, much less the Tigerboard.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan's TT source

The Pac 12 will move as soon as MU announces their move and, thank goodness, this cluster will come to an end with TT making the Pac 12 cut along with OU, OSU and KS.

I could see the PAC-10 making the pre-emptive jump to 14 (and all the temporarily unwieldy division alignments and travel situations it entails) to ensure it grabs OU and OSU and the SEC doesn't get them, but I can't see them going to a 16 that includes TT and KS. It doesn't make any sense when UT is the biggest prize available (even moreso than Notre Dame) and a massive improvement over anyone else - while the difference between TT/KS and the other options (assuming BYU is a non starter - UNLV? NM? Houston? Missouri? TCU? Boise St? SDSU?) really isn't much at all. Plus, Kansas may have another option (Big East), but where else is TT in danger of going? Just as the B10 will hold their (potential) 16th spot open for Notre Dame unless absolutely forced, so will the PAC-10 with Texas.

[Swaggs]

Yeah. Maybe Mondo thinks that is what will happen, but that info looks pretty suspect with the Pac 12 information. Oklahoma is clearly one of the few elite football programs in the country, but I don't see them having enough clout to bring 3 tagalongs with them. Oklahoma State, I can see. But both Tech AND Kansas seems like a blogger's daydream to me.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

I could see the PAC-10 making the pre-emptive jump to 14 (and all the temporarily unwieldy division alignments and travel situations it entails) to ensure it grabs OU and OSU and the SEC doesn't get them, but I can't see them going to a 16 that includes TT and KS. It doesn't make any sense when UT is the biggest prize available (even moreso than Notre Dame) and a massive improvement over anyone else - while the difference between TT/KS and the other options (assuming BYU is a non starter - UNLV? NM? Houston? Missouri? TCU? Boise St? SDSU?) really isn't much at all. Plus, Kansas may have another option (Big East), but where else is TT in danger of going? Just as the B10 will hold their (potential) 16th spot open for Notre Dame unless absolutely forced, so will the PAC-10 with Texas.

I do know that the Mizzou Rivals site reported late last week that Mizzou was offered a spot in the Pac-XX once A&M defects. The Mizzou admins declined the offer.

[MacroGuru]

I can pretty much assure you that if BYU joins the B12 it will be because assurances have been made by ALL member institutions that they are not going anywhere and are willing to stick this out.

I honestly think that right there would be the sign on what the others have decided.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I do know that the Mizzou Rivals site reported late last week that Mizzou was offered a spot in the Pac-XX once A&M defects. The Mizzou admins declined the offer.

hahaha. Oklahoma would need to turn us down for Missouri to get an invite. That hasn't happened and Missouri hasn't gotten an invite to the PAC-12. You yourself have claimed/insinuated that Missouri will take the first offer made

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

hahaha. Oklahoma would need to turn us down for Missouri to get an invite. That hasn't happened and Missouri hasn't gotten an invite to the PAC-12. You yourself have claimed/insinuated that Missouri will take the first offer made

I said they'd take the first offer betwen the SEC and B10. I never said anything about the Pac-XX.

You can call it whatever you want, but Mizzou did get a conditional invite (assuming an A&M defection) from the Pac-XX and did turn it down. The Aggie and Mizzou Rivals sites both were very clear it happened and got the information from someone involved in the process.

[MrBug708]

No. Why would Larry Scott give Missouri a conditional offer when he's content to wait out Texas?!? The logic makes little sense, even from a Missouri POV?

And why would the Aggie board have any insight into what Larry Scott is doing?

[tarcone]

Missouri is the most popular kid in school.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

No. Why would Larry Scott give Missouri a conditional offer when he's content to wait out Texas?!? The logic makes little sense, even from a Missouri POV?

And why would the Aggie board have any insight into what Larry Scott is doing?

What information are you reading/hearing that makes you think that they aren't talking to Dodds? For that matter, who isn't talking to Dodds at this point?

The Aggies and their admins are not negotiating in a bubble where they don't know what other teams are considering. The Aggies have a pretty good idea of what several schools are considering at this point and, as mentioned before, info is let out based on the benefit to certain institutions during this process.

[MrBug708]

I don't read anything from a Missouri board so I'm fairly confident in what I've seen/heard/read as being accurate

I just find it odd that a Missouri and TAMU board know whats going on, but the PAC-12 schools havent heard a thing about anything.

Very odd

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

I don't read anything from a Missouri board so I'm fairly confident in what I've seen/heard/read as being accurate

I just find it odd that a Missouri and TAMU board know whats going on, but the PAC-12 schools havent heard a thing about anything.

Very odd

Yeah, I can see how someone would be surprised that two of the schools heavily involved in expansion negotiations with multiple conferences would have more information on the situation than others.

[I. J. Reilly]

As far as possible additions for the PAC-12 goes, how could Kansas be invited without Kansas State?

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Yeah, I can see how someone would be surprised that two of the schools heavily involved in expansion negotiations with multiple conferences would have more information on the situation than others.

Let me know when a school the PAC-12 is interested becomes involved, then I won't be surprised

That and the Missouri board seems to be able to find every single rumor yet not a word has come out of the West Coast, where you know, the PAC-12 is situated.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by I. J. Reilly

As far as possible additions for the PAC-12 goes, how could Kansas be invited without Kansas State?

Yeah, that's a very good question. Popular thought was that the two were attached, but the latest rumblings amongst KC media is that might not be the case. Would be a shame to break those schools up.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by I. J. Reilly

As far as possible additions for the PAC-12 goes, how could Kansas be invited without Kansas State?

No way KSU ever ends up in the PAC-12

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

That and the Missouri board seems to be able to find every single rumor yet not a word has come out of the West Coast, where you know, the PAC-12 is situated.

Ever think that might be a credit to the Pac-XX admins rather than proof it isn't happening? If I was a Pac-XX fan, I'd stick my chest out that you don't have a bunch of admins acting like idiots. We've got World War III going on at a 2nd grade level here in the Big 12. It's means there's a whole lot of loose lips without much real leadership. But no info on the West Coast doesn't mean it's not happening. It just means that they're conducting business on a much more professional level than their B12 counterparts.
Count your blessings.

[MrBug708]

No, because info always gets out if enough people know about it. If people in the Big-12 know that the PAC-12 is giving conditional invites, it would be pretty common knowledge out here despite the usual "no comments" from the parties themselves.

Missouri "rejecting" the PAC-12 reeks of Missouri trying to create a situation of being desirable to another conference. Missouri is probably 6th on a list of potential invites to the PAC-12 so even if Texas says no, Oklahoma would have had to have said no and we both know that won't happen.

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I said they'd take the first offer betwen the SEC and B10. I never said anything about the Pac-XX.

You can call it whatever you want, but Mizzou did get a conditional invite (assuming an A&M defection) from the Pac-XX and did turn it down. The Aggie and Mizzou Rivals sites both were very clear it happened and got the information from someone involved in the process.

Is this like all the other double-secret probation invitations Missouri's had? I can understand why they turned down the PAC-12 invite since they're already playing Big Ten, Big East and SEC schedules.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

No, because info always gets out if enough people know about it. If people in the Big-12 know that the PAC-12 is giving conditional invites, it would be pretty common knowledge out here despite the usual "no comments" from the parties themselves.

Missouri "rejecting" the PAC-12 reeks of Missouri trying to create a situation of being desirable to another conference. Missouri is probably 6th on a list of potential invites to the PAC-12 so even if Texas says no, Oklahoma would have had to have said no and we both know that won't happen.

OU without question said no to any conditional A&M defection offer, which by default means OSU says no. They plan to stick it out with UT even after the A&M defection. They've make that perfectly clear both internally and externally. They're not happy with UT, but they're not pulling up stakes yet either.

Now if Mizzou leaves shortly after, then they likely rethink that option.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

OU without question said no to any conditional A&M defection offer, which by default means OSU says no. They plan to stick it out with UT even after the A&M defection. They've make that perfectly clear both internally and externally. They're not happy with UT, but they're not pulling up stakes yet either.

Now if Mizzou leaves shortly after, then they likely rethink that option.

I'm sure Mizzou is what is keeping OU in the Big XII

SI

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

No, because info always gets out if enough people know about it. If people in the Big-12 know that the PAC-12 is giving conditional invites, it would be pretty common knowledge out here despite the usual "no comments" from the parties themselves.

Missouri "rejecting" the PAC-12 reeks of Missouri trying to create a situation of being desirable to another conference. Missouri is probably 6th on a list of potential invites to the PAC-12 so even if Texas says no, Oklahoma would have had to have said no and we both know that won't happen.

Pretty much. Missouri really doesn't make any sense for the Pac-Whatever unless they're getting OU and/or Texas as well. The St. Louis/KC footprint is a nice added bonus, but not anything the Pac-Folk are going to fall all over themselves trying to acquire.

And I say that as a reasonably rabid Mizzou fan myself. Just ain't happening. Mizzou to the Pac-Whatever would be a bigger deal for the university than it would be for the conference. Likely also true of the SEC, but who knows what's happening with that.

If they were to leave the Big-12, the Big Ten makes the most sense, but it doesn't sound as if the Big Ten is all that interested. The impression MBBF's posts create in my head is the fat kid at the sandlot going "C'mon, guys, pick me! Guys! C'mon! Aw, what the hell was that? Pick me, guys, pick me!"

Is he any good? Maybe, but he's so god damned annoying that nobody wants anything to do with him.

And if I weren't a Mizzou fan myself, that's exactly the vibe I'd be getting from the constant breathless "Missouri is talking to *this* conference now!" updates.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I'm sure Mizzou is what is keeping OU in the Big XII

SI

You're being pretty disingenuous here. I will give you that MBBF is quite the homer and Mizzou is not the prize of college athletics but if the Big 12 goes down to 8 teams its all but over. You don't think KU is putting feelers out to the Big East or Pac 12 with only them, KState, and Iowa State left outside Oklahoma/Texas?

[panerd]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Pretty much. Missouri really doesn't make any sense for the Pac-Whatever unless they're getting OU and/or Texas as well. The St. Louis/KC footprint is a nice added bonus, but not anything the Pac-Folk are going to fall all over themselves trying to acquire.

And I say that as a reasonably rabid Mizzou fan myself. Just ain't happening. Mizzou to the Pac-Whatever would be a bigger deal for the university than it would be for the conference. Likely also true of the SEC, but who knows what's happening with that.

If they were to leave the Big-12, the Big Ten makes the most sense, but it doesn't sound as if the Big Ten is all that interested. The impression MBBF's posts create in my head is the fat kid at the sandlot going "C'mon, guys, pick me! Guys! C'mon! Aw, what the hell was that? Pick me, guys, pick me!"

Is he any good? Maybe, but he's so god damned annoying that nobody wants anything to do with him.

And if I weren't a Mizzou fan myself, that's exactly the vibe I'd be getting from the constant breathless "Missouri is talking to *this* conference now!" updates.

I'm with you here as well. All the national stuff I read has Mizzou as a footnote along with V-Tech, Clemson, G-Tech... A&M is the big story and is the one that is controlling the destiny of the big 12 right now. But I do think the Mizzou hatred is probably stronger on FOFC than just about anywhere else on the internet (except maybe phognet ). It kind of sucks because it would be fun to have a sensible talk without all of the nasty back and forth. (And yes I am aware of the main reason for this)

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Missouri is the most popular kid in school.

I think you mean Missouri is the easiest girl in school.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by panerd

I'm with you here as well. All the national stuff I read has Mizzou as a footnote along with V-Tech, Clemson, G-Tech... A&M is the big story and is the one that is controlling the destiny of the big 12 right now. But I do think the Mizzou hatred is probably stronger on FOFC than just about anywhere else on the internet (except maybe phognet ). It kind of sucks because it would be fun to have a sensible talk without all of the nasty back and forth. (And yes I am aware of the main reason for this)

I dunno. I don't get the sense that FOFC 'hates' Mizzou.

I get the sense that they're less-than-fond of MBBF and that Mizzou is more a natural proxy by way of which to poke fun at him.

The Texas/OU fans likely make fun of the school either way, but if MBBF became a hermit tomorrow, I doubt you'd see, say, Bug making snide comments about the school; what reason would exist for him to do so?

[Swaggs]

Interesting history piece on the SEC and ACC expansions 20-years ago: 1990-1991 SEC Expansion - Arkansas & South Carolina join Southeastern Conference | Saturday Down South

Seems as if the SEC was trying to shore up Florida with Miami and FSU and/or get into Texas, but kind of failed on both fronts and ended up with Arkansas and South Carolina. Looks like Florida State had their choice of conferences and Bowden preferred the ACC due to it being perceived as an easier path at the time, while Miami felt their fanbase and prospective students were more likely to come from the Northeast, so they went with the Big East.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I'm sure Mizzou is what is keeping OU in the Big XII

SI

OU has all but said that through message board leaks and the OU writers in Oklahoma have said it as well. If A&M leaves, no big deal. Just add 1-3 new teams and restart. If Mizzou leaves immediately afterwards, it's every school for itself. You could reverse the schools and have A&M leave second and I suppose it would be A&M is what's keeping OU in the conference, but it's the same scenario in the end.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

I dunno. I don't get the sense that FOFC 'hates' Mizzou.

I get the sense that they're less-than-fond of MBBF and that Mizzou is more a natural proxy by way of which to poke fun at him.

The Texas/OU fans likely make fun of the school either way, but if MBBF became a hermit tomorrow, I doubt you'd see, say, Bug making snide comments about the school; what reason would exist for him to do so?

Meh, I'm just here to have a good time and discuss the topic. If others want to discuss it, great. If not, they're free to entertain themselves. We're grown-ups here.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Meh, I'm just here to have a good time and discuss the topic. If others want to discuss it, great. If not, they're free to entertain themselves. We're grown-ups here.

I'm only saying, insofar as Missouri athletics are a lightning rod at FOFC, it's by proxy. You're a force multiplier, you might say.

[sterlingice]

One thing is for sure- the title for this thread still applies

SI

[Swaggs]

What would Missouri's order of preference be if they received simultaneous offers from the top 3 conferences?

I imagine it would be Big Ten by a landslide, followed by the SEC and then Pac XX, but I would not imagine that they would decline a Pac offer holding out hope for one of the other two.

Plus, for sports the SEC is far more attractive, but for university affiliation, I imagine most presidents would rather be involved with the Pac schools.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

What would Missouri's order of preference be if they received simultaneous offers from the top 3 conferences?

I imagine it would be Big Ten by a landslide, followed by the SEC and then Pac XX, but I would not imagine that they would decline a Pac offer holding out hope for one of the other two.

Most believe that Alden and Deaton are holding out for a B10 deal, even to the point that they may balk at a SEC option. Their problem is that if a SEC offer comes and they turn it down, it's going to get out. Much like politics, there are going to be some pissed off donors who will leak it and make them look bad.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

What would Missouri's order of preference be if they received simultaneous offers from the top 3 conferences?

I imagine it would be Big Ten by a landslide, followed by the SEC and then Pac XX, but I would not imagine that they would decline a Pac offer holding out hope for one of the other two.

Plus, for sports the SEC is far more attractive, but for university affiliation, I imagine most presidents would rather be involved with the Pac schools.

Other than maybe Texas, the "third party" sports like baseball, volleyball, soccer et al do not make the PAC-12 for a very attractive destination for schools because of the ability to compete. That being said, having access to California for those sports are second to none in a lot of them. Unless you hockey and lacrosse, then we're terrible or non-existent

[tarcone]

I would think Mizzou would look to SLU to see what it is like to play in a conference with most schools on the coast. I cant see Mizzou going to the Pac-##. It just doesnt make sense. Unless OU, OSU and TT go with them.

Still, Thats a lot of travel and a lot of late games in the midwest.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I would think Mizzou would look to SLU to see what it is like to play in a conference with most schools on the coast. I cant see Mizzou going to the Pac-##. It just doesnt make sense. Unless OU, OSU and TT go with them.

Still, Thats a lot of travel and a lot of late games in the midwest.

Not necessarily. If Mizzou were in the Pac-xx, it would be because the conference had expanded to 16, and that would mean an Eastern division of 8 schools in the Mountain and Central time zones. For football at least, there wouldn't be any more than 1 game per year in the Pacific time zone.

That said, the distance is still larger than for any of the other Big-12 schools that would be likely Pac-12 targets...

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

Other than maybe Texas, the "third party" sports like baseball, volleyball, soccer et al do not make the PAC-12 for a very attractive destination for schools because of the ability to compete. That being said, having access to California for those sports are second to none in a lot of them. Unless you('re [sic]) hockey and lacrosse, then we're terrible or non-existent

Not that it's even a blip on the radar that involves D1 football, but (outside of a pocket in Denver) lacrosse is a lot bigger in Cali than any place west of Ohio. Texas is making inroads due to their unstructured nature (coaches can coach year-round, etc) and the sheer athleticism/work ethic that Texas HS football demands, but otherwise everything west of the eastern seaboard states is a joke. Cali at least has a couple club teams (Alcatraz, etc) that consolidate and showcase talent, unlike the rest of the western time zones.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I'm sure Mizzou is what is keeping OU in the Big XII

SI

Who says Mizzou is keeping OU in the Big 12? OU, that's who.

OU sources say Missouri departure would doom Big 12 | NewsOK.com

[MrBug708]

Well, that's common sense. If Missouri and TAMU leave, that puts the Big-12 at just 8 members

That guy talking in the link might have one of the most annoying voices

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Yeah, that's a very good question. Popular thought was that the two were attached, but the latest rumblings amongst KC media is that might not be the case. Would be a shame to break those schools up.

Officially, Kansas and Kansas State are not attached. Unofficially, there are a lot of politics involved in separating the two as the current governor is a Kansas State guy. The ties go even further as the current athletic director is an alum of both schools and worked with the Kansas State football program early in his career. This just means that Kansas is not likely allowed to be pro-active in courting a new conference unless Kansas State is included.

My guess is that if the Big 12 implodes then Kansas' likely destination is the Big East simply because that would then allow Kansas State to tag along. Personally, I think that's a bad idea as the Big East is the next major conference to get cherry picked (by the Big Ten or ACC). If Kansas was allowed to be pro-active I could see them working with Missouri and Oklahoma on finding a new conference. I just don't think Kansas will be allowed that opportunity.

[tarcone]

I was thinking how happy I am to be a fan of a team in a conference that is going to be cherry-picking, as opposed to being cherry-picked. I would especially hate to be an Iowa State fan (but not just because of the conference, I hate them just on principle) or Missouri or Kansas State. You have to be worried that you will end up in a non-AQ conference. What a huge let down that would be.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I was thinking how happy I am to be a fan of a team in a conference that is going to be cherry-picking, as opposed to being cherry-picked. I would especially hate to be an Iowa State fan (but not just because of the conference, I hate them just on principle) or Missouri or Kansas State. You have to be worried that you will end up in a non-AQ conference. What a huge let down that would be.

I don't think you have to worry about Missouri. They are the only BCS caliber school in their state and thus they can be pro-active when looking at other conferences. Iowa State, Kansas State, Baylor, Texas Tech, and Kansas are probably the Big 12 schools looking to get left out of the conference carousel. I think Oklahoma and Oklahoma State are tied together and will land either in the SEC or Pac due to Oklahoma's clout. Texas will end up in a conference at some point and could possibly take Texas Tech with them.

The next few weeks will be very interesting to see what exactly the Big 12 decides to do. Will they expand or simply collapse? I think it's more likely they expand because I don't think the SEC or Big Ten is currently ready to expand west at this time unless Oklahoma was included in the expansion.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I was thinking how happy I am to be a fan of a team in a conference that is going to be cherry-picking, as opposed to being cherry-picked. I would especially hate to be an Iowa State fan (but not just because of the conference, I hate them just on principle) or Missouri or Kansas State. You have to be worried that you will end up in a non-AQ conference. What a huge let down that would be.

In the current climate of college football (ie $$$) I am pretty sure Mizzou will survive. I don't think they are the darlings that any conference has at the top of their wishlist but their teams have been solid lately and more importantly they deliver TV markets #21 and #31.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I was thinking how happy I am to be a fan of a team in a conference that is going to be cherry-picking, as opposed to being cherry-picked. I would especially hate to be an Iowa State fan (but not just because of the conference, I hate them just on principle) or Missouri or Kansas State. You have to be worried that you will end up in a non-AQ conference. What a huge let down that would be.

The silly notion that there's going to be all these teams left out of AQ conferences has to be one of the funniest parts of this whole deal. There's going to be plenty of AQ conference spots available. You're going to have to go much further down the pecking order than even Iowa State before you start worrying about being 'left out' of college football's 'haves'. The realignment also is expected to help with a playoff format, so the current format likely won't even be in place by that time.

[Toddzilla]

Everything I keep hearing out of Blacksburg is that right now, if no other ACC teams are in the mix, Virginia Tech is a solid NO for the SEC. Of course they'd be forced to reconsider if, say, FSU and NCSU made the leap, but it will absolutely not happen on their own. The President is against the move, the AD is against the move, and most importantly Frank Beamer is against the move.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Just FWIW, anyone who thinks all of this college realignment talk is confusing ought to see what's going on with high school reclassification in Georgia.

I don't think I'll even try to explain the nearly year long clusterfuck that has turned into (and it still isn't completely settled even after two more votes today). It makes congressional redistricting look like Kindergarten work by comparison.