Conference Re-Alignment Thread Part Who Knows

[AuburnAlumni]

Breaking news ... Aggies approved president taking action with issue of conference alignment

I wonder if certain people on here are still "chuckling"?

Now the road is a bit more clear for a formal SEC invite... Most likely Wednesday.

[coogrfan]

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

STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN DAN BRANCH REGARDING POSTPONEMENT OF HEARING TO DISCUSS COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC CONFERENCE REALIGNMENTS (excerpt)_

"While events may continue to evolve in the coming weeks, at this time, there is no immediate need to evaluate the merits of an athletic conference reconfiguration involving Texas A&M University and, potentially, other Texas public universities. If the current situation changes, our Committee is prepared to convene."

Read more: http://sportsblogs.star-telegram.com...#ixzz1V8VovH8h

That doesn't mean the Ags won't be moving at some point (with all the bridges they have burned, they probably will). It does seem to indicate that nothing is in the immediate offing.

[doom41]

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

And there was no discussion on alignment issue in aggie open session. Just a quick motion and second

This wasn't about approving the move. It was about giving the President authority to act so that the BOR don't have to call another meeting then wait three days after the meeting agenda is posted in order to meet. Now the A&M president can negotiate, decide to leave the Big 12, and apply to the SEC without needing anyone elses approval.

[Bondgirl0072]

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

A&M hearing postponed, but process rolls on

http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1252192

[Redacted01]

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

surely it had to be Texas' fault somehow right, everything is lol

You have to be one of the biggest blind homers if you don't know why Arkansas left the SWC... but go on living in your dream world if it helps you sleep at night.

[ZB9]

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

You have to be one of the biggest blind homers if you don't know why Arkansas left the SWC... but go on living in your dream world if it helps you sleep at night.

go ahead and enlighten me

be sure and provide some examples

[Redacted01]

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

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/378202-how-the-texas-longhorns-diminished-college-football-in-texas

Now hopefully you can start to see the light a bit. UT is not the only reason the SWC died. It would have died any way in the end, much like the Big West, because there is no market for a conference in a single state (and the Big West made the mistake of taking anyone and everyone in the 90's just to survive) but forcing Arkansas out sealed their immediate fate. Texas ruled that conference just like they rule the Big 12... but let me guess, if the Big 12 dies, you think Texas is the good kid who did no wrong and it is A&M, Nebraska, Colorado, and anyone else's fault who prevents it from surviving.

[ZB9]

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

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/3...tball-in-texas

Now hopefully you can start to see the light a bit. UT is not the only reason the SWC died. It would have died any way in the end, much like the Big West, because there is no market for a conference in a single state (and the Big West made the mistake of taking anyone and everyone in the 90's just to survive) but forcing Arkansas out sealed their immediate fate. Texas ruled that conference just like they rule the Big 12... but let me guess, if the Big 12 dies, you think Texas is the good kid who did no wrong and it is A&M, Nebraska, Colorado, and anyone else's fault who prevents it from surviving.

I ask for examples and you provide a bleacher report "article"? That does not help your credibility at all.

Where the **** did I imply that Texas was "the good kid who did no wrong"? It's not really about "wrong" anyway. This is the USA, it's about business. Major college football is certainly about business, and not just when it comes to UT. Texas is just better at it and more ambitious than most.

[Perfect Zero]

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

I know you admitted it was extreme, but when Arkansas/South Carolina joined the SEC like 20 years ago they didn't do anything to screw up the tradition already in place, whereas the 4 team divisions would make the SEC a league of 16 loosely affiliated teams with the same brand on their jersey playing for the same championship. That scheduling variety would be fun, but it doesn't necessarily bring what is, imo, the most exciting part of college football (passion). I mean why does someone like me, who has never even been to either state, bother tuning in to something like the red-river shootout?

So are you saying that a divisional game between Louisiana State and Texas A&M would not be as exciting as Louisiana State vs. Florida, or Auburn, or Alabama? If the game means something in the standings, it's going to mean a lot when it comes to the field. If you're having to play these teams week in and week out, you're going to force some rivalries. With a rotating schedule, you can also keep some of the rivalries in tact once every few years (and perhaps more if they finish in the same position). I agree, passion is what drives college football. However, I highly doubt Louisiana State says "**** it, we're playing Old Miss, time to screw around" when they play Mississippi. I'm sure both teams duke it out as hard as they can because they are playing for divisional rank.

Also, it wouldn't be the same schedule every year. 8 teams per division means each team will have 7 divisional games. I would imagine at that point they would go from 8 conference games per year to 9 leaving 2 rotating teams every year which is the same set up that the SEC currently has with 6 teams per division (5 divisional conference games + 1 protected rivalry leaves just 2 rotating games every year).

In your scenario, I'm thinking that there would be nine conference games, seven against divisional opponents, one against a protected rival, and one rotating game. Whoop-ti-doo, one different game every year. I can't wait until 2025 to watch Texas A&M host Florida!

Besides, if we are talking about tradition, who is A&M's permanent rival? Texas A&M doesn't have much in common with Florida State. Virginia Tech is the only close rival I can think of because both schools are rooted in the corps. Of course, you can turn my words on myself and say it will develop over time, but why do I want to watch the SEC West, plus a team that plays only one other team in my division for two thirds of the season? It doesn't make sense.

I'm not saying that rivalries can't develop, but they take time and they have a long way to go to reach the 100 year histories that many of the current SEC rivalries have now. Regardless of that fact though Arkansas developed these rivalries in the SEC by playing Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, and Miss St every season for the last 20 years. In the 4 division layout the only teams Arkansas has a chance at developing a rivalry with are Texas A&M, LSU, and Mizzou (current history between any of those matchups notwithstanding) because they are the only 3 teams Arkansas will ever see on a consistent basis. I could agree with you that the scheduling variety would be fun, except for those reasons mentioned earlier in this post, but this format is not one that has much hope of leading towards a bunch of new rivalries.

I'll go back to what I said earlier with the AFC. The Steelers, Patriots and Colts don't play in the same division, but they have some of the strongest rivalries in football. What I'm saying for the SEC is when there are teams that are constantly good, they will play each other every year. That lends itself to its own rivalry, PLUS it keeps in tact many other rivalries (even though some might have to skip a year or two). And as I've said before, if tradition really mattered, the SEC would stay at 12 until the second coming of Christ. There are going to have to be changes in order to keep the product in the forefront of minds. The SEC has a chance to corner the market on college football, and scheduling and seeding like this will help it accomplish just that. There will still be rivalries, there will still be passion, and there will now be the higher chance of more competitive football.

[TheGamingChef]

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

Reports that Dan Beebe and Mike Slive had a heated phone conversation last week. Would have loved to have been able to listen to that.

[DonkeyJote]

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

In your scenario, I'm thinking that there would be nine conference games, seven against divisional opponents, one against a protected rival, and one rotating game.

For the record, if you think a 16 team, two division conference is going to have 9 conference games, you're nuts. It's going to be at least 10, not including a Championship game. And if we get to 4 16-team super conferences, and they break away from the NCAA as some have speculated might happen (I don't see them breaking away, but it could happen), I bet the 12-game schedule is gone and it goes to 13 or 14.

[KSUowls]

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

So are you saying that a divisional game between Louisiana State and Texas A&M would not be as exciting as Louisiana State vs. Florida, or Auburn, or Alabama? If the game means something in the standings, it's going to mean a lot when it comes to the field. If you're having to play these teams week in and week out, you're going to force some rivalries. With a rotating schedule, you can also keep some of the rivalries in tact once every few years (and perhaps more if they finish in the same position). I agree, passion is what drives college football. However, I highly doubt Louisiana State says "**** it, we're playing Old Miss, time to screw around" when they play Mississippi. I'm sure both teams duke it out as hard as they can because they are playing for divisional rank.

Texas A&M vs. LSU will have an immediate novelty, but LSU-Florida, LSU-Alabama, LSU-Auburn will always be more exciting from a tradition standpoint. I'll address the rest of this point at the bottom to keep it organized.

In your scenario, I'm thinking that there would be nine conference games, seven against divisional opponents, one against a protected rival, and one rotating game. Whoop-ti-doo, one different game every year. I can't wait until 2025 to watch Texas A&M host Florida!

Actually my last post stated this:
" I would imagine at that point they would go from 8 conference games per year to 9 leaving 2 rotating teams every year which is the same set up that the SEC currently has with 6 teams per division (5 divisional conference games + 1 protected rivalry leaves just 2 rotating games every year)."

Besides, if we are talking about tradition, who is A&M's permanent rival? Texas A&M doesn't have much in common with Florida State. Virginia Tech is the only close rival I can think of because both schools are rooted in the corps. Of course, you can turn my words on myself and say it will develop over time, but why do I want to watch the SEC West, plus a team that plays only one other team in my division for two thirds of the season? It doesn't make sense.

I have plenty of respect for TAMU's tradition, but I don't really view them as very relevant in the context of this. They are the new kid on the block so to speak. Their lack of history with the current SEC does not mean the rest of the SEC with deep seeded history with each other should be broken up.

I'll go back to what I said earlier with the AFC. The Steelers, Patriots and Colts don't play in the same division, but they have some of the strongest rivalries in football. What I'm saying for the SEC is when there are teams that are constantly good, they will play each other every year. That lends itself to its own rivalry, PLUS it keeps in tact many other rivalries (even though some might have to skip a year or two). And as I've said before, if tradition really mattered, the SEC would stay at 12 until the second coming of Christ. There are going to have to be changes in order to keep the product in the forefront of minds. The SEC has a chance to corner the market on college football, and scheduling and seeding like this will help it accomplish just that. There will still be rivalries, there will still be passion, and there will now be the higher chance of more competitive football.

Let me begin by saying I can't entirely agree with your point about tradition being thrown out the window. The SEC has shown in the past that maintaining it's tradition is important. 20 years ago the conference expanded to 12 teams and they made sure long time relationships were not severed. Greed is what started all of this for sure, but I think they will try very hard to protect the tradition. It is a point of pride afterall.

Now, the point about the NFL is accurate, but the comparison is fundamentally flawed.

To start off I think we can all agree that professional sport rivalries do not take on the same character as those in college do. You can pick your reason for that more passion about college teams, more consistent scheduling, longer running history, whatever...point is that it is just kind of different.

More importantly though, unlike other sports, college football does not have a playoff system and the single elimination playoff system of the NFL is why teams like the Colts, Pats, and Steelers can form rivalries despite only seeing each other maybe twice in 3 years in the playoffs. Even if you go through periods where you don't play a team, if the times when you are playing them has such high stakes as single elimination playoffs do then it allows for a quick buildup. Such rivalries are also subject to high turnover though because as soon as one of those teams stops being relevant (or seeding makes it so that they don't meet) then that rivalry will just fade away into obscurity.


This is just to kind of finish off my point about rivalries and why the 4 divisions make more than just a handful of rivalries possible:
a.)The first ingredient for a rivalry is that the teams have to see each other. Obvious I know, but it needs to be said. Florida State and Colorado State don't exactly have a heated relationship.
b.) Next the teams need to see each other on some kind of a regular basis. Georgia sees each of the SEC West teams (not named Auburn) twice every 5 year period (slightly more frequent than the proposed 4 divisions would allow even), but it has not developed big rivalries with Alabama, LSU, Miss, Miss St, or Arkansas.
c.) The last major piece of this puzzle is that there has to be something between the teams that sparks the rivalry. A bunch of close games, knocking them out of championship contention, or whatever.

The point I'm trying to make here is that many historic rivalries will without a doubt be destroyed over time and that the maximum number of new rivalries that can be created for any one team is 3. I emphasize maximum because it certainly isn't a guarantee that frequent matchups will form one of these relationships. For instance, Georgia and Tennessee have met about 50 times in the last 100 years and every year since 1992, but it does not fall into that category.


ETA:
I just saw your post Donkey and you make a good point. 10 conference games might be more realistic in a 16 team conference. Hard to say for sure though because that would potentially eliminate up to 2 home games for a school from what the current 12 team format allows.

[Redacted01]

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

I ask for examples and you provide a bleacher report "article"? That does not help your credibility at all.

Where the **** did I imply that Texas was "the good kid who did no wrong"? It's not really about "wrong" anyway. This is the USA, it's about business. Major college football is certainly about business, and not just when it comes to UT. Texas is just better at it and more ambitious than most.

Article was full of examples. The guy has written on football in Texas for years. He laid it all out as to what Texas did. But fine, don't read it. I guess I'll just have to go pick you up and go interview everyone involved since you want examples so bad. Go on not believing it. Your attitude this whole thread any time any one mentions anything bad about UT is "Psssh, yea right." And sure, it is about business, but when every other conference can manage to share just fine, it's kind of odd how Texas seems to get much larger pieces of the pie. There is business, and then there is playing dirty.

But seeing as you seem to only know Big 12 and know nothing on the SWC and are from Austin, I doubt you'll be changing your tune any time soon. You do know last year wasn't the first time Texas talked with the Pac-10 right? They did this back around 1990 and basically told Arkansas that they'd have nothing to do with them wherever they went and that's when Broyles headed off to the SEC. A&M was more buddy-buddy with Texas then, but now this time, it is A&M that wants out from UT. As long as Texas keeps up the way they are, no conference is going to really want them aside from saying "Hey, we have Texas." Who knows, had Texas bolted then, maybe we'd be talking about the Pac-12 getting poached today. A private school like Baylor would be more than happy to tag along, but they only got in with them the first time because of government.

http://www.andthevalleyshook.com/2010/6/12/1514979/poseur-steps-in-the-wayback

Another great read...

[Bondgirl0072]

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

Messy Big 12 divorce inevitable for Texas A&M with SEC looming

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...m.reliagnment/

[acts238shaun]

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

http://kznx-am.tritondigitalmedia.com/includes/news_items/6/3122/secguy81511.mp3

Funniest and most homer-ific call I've ever heard!!!