Conference Re-Alignment Thread Part Who Knows

[TDenverFan]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

Also, If the ACC loses 2 Teams, Kansas and K-State to the ACC?

And Baylor and Iowa State to the MWC?

[Perfect Zero]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

My point was that Georgia/Clemson was once a big rivalry, but due to lack of scheduling for a period of time it stopped being a rivalry. So, a format where you constantly changing up who you play isn't very conducive of either maintaining or developing new rivalries. To answer your question though I don't know how big the rivalry was exactly as it hasn't been serious since before I started watching football. I just know that there is a lot of history and when that home/home series occurred in the early 2000s there were a lot of older people talking about how big the rivalry was.

Is the complete destruction of nearly every major rivalry in one of the historic conferences in football really more fun than having 7 divisional games + 2 out of division + conference championship?

To clear up what I was saying with Georgia and Clemson: I was trying to point out that rivals change over time in any sport. The best example I have to my personal experience was the Texas Rangers rivalry with the Kansas City Royals. They used to play in the same division and the Royals used to get the better of us. Then when the divisions were split up, the Royals stopped being our main rival and the Los Angeles Angels took over that position.

Using Baseball in another example, you could argue that the inclusion of interleague play was a shot in the arm for attendance. Teams that people had never seen at the ballpark were (and still are in some cases) coming in for the first time. There was new blood in the opponent's dugout, and it draws quite a bit of fans.

In a rotating divisional system, you're going to break up some rivalries, but I guarantee you that you're going to see new rivalries and better football. Louisiana State and Texas A&M don't have a rivalry in the least bit now, but pair them in a four team division and things will heat up rapidly. Heck, if Florida and Louisiana State are in the top of their division for the next four to five years, that means they play each other in the next four to five years. If you schedule like the NFC or AFC, you're going to face the best competition week in and week out. If the SEC is looking for the biggest television contract, it would be nuts to throw away competition like that.

I understand that rivalries are important; being a fan of the Aggies I know what it means to beat Texas every Thanksgiving weekend. However, I also know that if you want to have the best football possible, you have to make tough changes. I want to see the best football from the best conference: that's why I will be elated if A&M goes to the SEC. What I don't want to see is the same stuff from the past: an old guard trying to modernize while hording the past. Take it from my experience; that will never work.

[Bondgirl0072]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

So when will A&M enter the SEC? 2012 or 2013?

A&M hopes to play in the SEC in 2012 according to A&M sources.

[Bondgirl0072]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

Who do you guys think follows Texas A&M to the SEC?

[TheGamingChef]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

Yes. I believe the MWC had talked with those schools.

Last summer the MWC had about as much contact with KU/KSU/UM/ISU as the Big Ten did. Those four schools had a standing offer from the Big East that they were prepared to take if TTU/OU/OSU/UT went to the Pac-10. The only Big 12 school that stood to potentially be left out was Baylor.

This situation changes with TCU entering the Big East. They only need 3 schools to get to 12. However if conference expansion happens and the Big XII folds, it is likely that the Big East will take any/all of those 5 (Baylor/ISU/KU/KSU/Mizzou) and get to 14 or 16.

How? Over 3-5 Years (Redshirt/Leaving Early) and 9 OOC Games, how will you not play everybody?

16 teams in a conference, depending on how they are set up you could have 2 divisions of 8. If you play 9 conference games you're only playing 2 teams from the other division each season. If you do it home-and-home and alternate teams every two years, you'll play a total of 11 teams (out of the 15) in your conference over 4 years. How can it seem right to have an athlete graduate without ever playing 25% of the conference?

[Redacted01]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

To clear up what I was saying with Georgia and Clemson: I was trying to point out that rivals change over time in any sport. The best example I have to my personal experience was the Texas Rangers rivalry with the Kansas City Royals. They used to play in the same division and the Royals used to get the better of us. Then when the divisions were split up, the Royals stopped being our main rival and the Los Angeles Angels took over that position.

Using Baseball in another example, you could argue that the inclusion of interleague play was a shot in the arm for attendance. Teams that people had never seen at the ballpark were (and still are in some cases) coming in for the first time. There was new blood in the opponent's dugout, and it draws quite a bit of fans.

In a rotating divisional system, you're going to break up some rivalries, but I guarantee you that you're going to see new rivalries and better football. Louisiana State and Texas A&M don't have a rivalry in the least bit now, but pair them in a four team division and things will heat up rapidly. Heck, if Florida and Louisiana State are in the top of their division for the next four to five years, that means they play each other in the next four to five years. If you schedule like the NFC or AFC, you're going to face the best competition week in and week out. If the SEC is looking for the biggest television contract, it would be nuts to throw away competition like that.

I understand that rivalries are important; being a fan of the Aggies I know what it means to beat Texas every Thanksgiving weekend. However, I also know that if you want to have the best football possible, you have to make tough changes. I want to see the best football from the best conference: that's why I will be elated if A&M goes to the SEC. What I don't want to see is the same stuff from the past: an old guard trying to modernize while hording the past. Take it from my experience; that will never work.

They have played 50 games (only played Arkansas 17 more times and they were in the same conference). Hell, they played every year from 1960 to 1975 (86-95 as well). Don't think it'd take much to build it back up.

[Perfect Zero]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

They have played 50 games (only played Arkansas 17 more times and they were in the same conference). Hell, they played every year from 1960 to 1975 (86-95 as well). Don't think it'd take much to build it back up.

I know, but if you ask the current crop of student about Louisiana State, they would say that games against Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Baylor are more important. If they were in the same division, it would build up quick. I.e., that's the point I was trying to make.

[gerg1234]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

16 teams in a conference, depending on how they are set up you could have 2 divisions of 8. If you play 9 conference games you're only playing 2 teams from the other division each season. If you do it home-and-home and alternate teams every two years, you'll play a total of 11 teams (out of the 15) in your conference over 4 years. How can it seem right to have an athlete graduate without ever playing 25% of the conference?

I doubt they would set it up that way for that very reason. They would probably rotate through the pairs rather than do a home and home. So you would play them at home one season and play them on the road 4 years later. Every 8 years you get them at home.

This is still pretty crazy, to get a conference member at home only once every 8 years.

[Redacted01]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

I know, but if you ask the current crop of student about Louisiana State, they would say that games against Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Baylor are more important. If they were in the same division, it would build up quick. I.e., that's the point I was trying to make.

Now if more people would just see it. Right now, I don't think A&M really wants much to do with Texas. Most A&M fans I know, and I know quite a few, are loving the idea of ditching UT.

[coogrfan]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

Dude it's done.

Last year the blogosphere insisted that Texas to the Pac-whatever was a "done deal" too; how did that work out?

It ain't done til it's done.

No it's not. It's assumed done, probably about 99%. The SEC has to approve it (don't see why they wouldn't as they were interested in A&M last year) and A&M has to approve it. Both will probably happen, but they haven't happened yet.

This, plus the Texas Legislature has to sign off on it.

Understand, people...we're talking about the second largest state supported university in Texas. As such TAMU currently shares w/UT the benefit of exclusive access to Texas's Permanent University Fund (an investment portfolio for oil and mineral rights from state owned lands; it's total value in recent years has been in the $8-10 billion range). This extraordinary relationship has significantly contributed to both UT and TAMU being consistently ranked amongst the wealthiest colleges and universities by endowment in the nation:

2010 rankings (public universities)

• Harvard $27.557 bil
• Yale $16.652
• Princeton $14.391
• UT system $14.052
• Stanford $8.51
• MIT $8.317
• Michigan $6.564
• Columbia $6.517
• Northwestern $5.945
• TAMU system $5.738

In short, the state of Texas has a major investment in these two schools. That's why when a state rep. says " My only predisposition is to have something that is a value-added opportunity for the state of Texas", it needs to be taken seriously.

This isn't solely about what's best for TAMU or the SEC...it's about what's best for our state. If the TAMU leadership can convince the Legislature that this move fits that criteria it will happen. If they can't, it won't.

[Hoosiers86IU]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

[quote=TheGamingChef;2042725332]Last summer the MWC had about as much contact with KU/KSU/UM/ISU as the Big Ten did. Those four schools had a standing offer from the Big East that they were prepared to take if TTU/OU/OSU/UT went to the Pac-10. The only Big 12 school that stood to potentially be left out was Baylor.

This situation changes with TCU entering the Big East. They only need 3 schools to get to 12. However if conference expansion happens and the Big XII folds, it is likely that the Big East will take any/all of those 5 (Baylor/ISU/KU/KSU/Mizzou) and get to 14 or 16.

I Just don't see Baylor getting the Big East life raft. TCU is still VERY bitter over Baylor getting in the Big XII after the break up of the SWC, and having to live as a nomad ever since (WAC to CUSA to Mountain West to Big East). I'm sure TCU will lobby hard to prevent Baylor from joining the Big East. If the Big East wants a second Texas program, Houston would be the better choice.

When it's all said and done I Do think Kansas, Kansas State, and Iowa State will go to the Big East.

[Redacted01]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

[quote=Hoosiers86IU;2042725407]

Last summer the MWC had about as much contact with KU/KSU/UM/ISU as the Big Ten did. Those four schools had a standing offer from the Big East that they were prepared to take if TTU/OU/OSU/UT went to the Pac-10. The only Big 12 school that stood to potentially be left out was Baylor.

This situation changes with TCU entering the Big East. They only need 3 schools to get to 12. However if conference expansion happens and the Big XII folds, it is likely that the Big East will take any/all of those 5 (Baylor/ISU/KU/KSU/Mizzou) and get to 14 or 16.

I Just don't see Baylor getting the Big East life raft. TCU is still VERY bitter over Baylor getting in the Big XII after the break up of the SWC, and having to live as a nomad ever since (WAC to CUSA to Mountain West to Big East). I'm sure TCU will lobby hard to prevent Baylor from joining the Big East. If the Big East wants a second Texas program, Houston would be the better choice.

When it's all said and done I Do think Kansas, Kansas State, and Iowa State will go to the Big East.

TCU chose to change conferences every full moon. No one forced to them to keep migrating. The WAC would have been pretty strong if they had stayed in there the whole time. I mean, come on, Nevada, Hawai'i, Fresno, Boise, and TCU in the same conference?

[tHurley2010]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

All I want to know is that if Aggie leaves for the SEC, will the Big XII send officiating crews that will call games against Texas A&M. Or will Kansas State put up another sign in their stadium saying, "Treason". I'm glad we got out of there last year.

[kodiak]

I said it the other day but we(FSU) are not going to the SEC.

The SEC does not want FSU and FSU does not want the SEC.

When the superconference movement happens, FSU will be a member in one of them.

By going to the SEC, FSU would be a middle of the pack program when talking about stadium size, athletic budget, and booster contributions. In the ACC, we are the top dog.

Not being in the SEC did not hurt us when it came to playing in the first 3 BCS title games.

The gentlemens agreement amongst the SEC schools would make it tough for 9/12 schools to approve FSU. UF,Auburn, Bama, UGA, SC, would not approve of FSU.

Also been stated that UF, UGA, and SC all oppose a same state school being invited.




---
- Sent from.....

[Perfect Zero]

Re: A&M to the SEC starting to blow up again on Twitter

OK, I took the time to put into Google Docs what I am talking about. This document has two spreadsheets. The first is the standings if the Aggies, Tigers, Tigers, and Seminoles were in the SEC last year. That forms the basis for the second spreadsheet, which is how the schedule would be. The teams highlighted in green would be rotated every three years.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...FWF9nSlE#gid=0

EDIT: Forgot to mention that if you don't use Google Docs often: you switch between spreadsheets by clicking on the tabs in the bottom left portion of your browser.

I admit that it's hard to wrap one's brain around the idea of rotating divisions and temporary alignments for Conference Championship purposes, but I feel that this would be the best way for the SEC to go about scheduling. It creates exciting football, gives lower placed teams a chance to win against weaker opponents, and provides the best football possible when the number one teams from last year have to play each other in the next.

I admit that I don't know too much about all the rivalries in the SEC, but I counted 14 on the Wikipedia template. You can't protect every single one of these in a 16 team conference (and it's hard to do in a 14 team setting). However, if you move the divisions around like it is done in the NFL, you create more chances to see all of the teams. More teams equals better and fresher matchups, and better matchups equals more viewers, which equals more money.