vatech, va. pick up the huge dc market which the sec gets nothing as it is. florida, texas and atlanta (GaTech) are already decent bases for the SEC. Va would be the tough get because of academics i think, and they stink at fb, but bball is ok. geography is ok, especially since you add both to the east and move vandy to west. certainly, tx and txam are the top choice.
Just imagine this as our lineup: SEC West LSU Bama U Texas Texas AM Ark Ole Miss Auburn SEC East Florida U Tenn UGA FSU UK USCe Ga Tech Kick Vandy and Miss St to the curb.
Well, if it were up to me I'd try to only expand to 14 to avoid a total scheduling overhaul. Texas and aTm would be optimal for a million reasons, but other than those two I would say that any one of Florida St./Georgia Tech/UNC/Clemson and TCU. VTech would also be nice, but I don't see Va. in the SEC, JMO.
i agree with staying put but just wanted to throw this out there. i like your proposal and would submit a few options of my own.... Option 1) add 2 teams with two teams you could keep divisions they way they are especially if you add a team to the west and one to the east. likely candidates would be: east-Ga Tech, FSU, Miami, Va Tech, Louisville, Clemson, and USF. west- Texas A&M, TCU, Oklahoma, Okie St, Houston. one of the things that makes the SEC work like grad said is geography. and one thing this mega expansion will do to the other conferences is make their gaps in geography that much more pronounced. but with these teams above you still don't expand that much however. granted a trip from college station or fort worth to lexington or gainesville is a hike. but it's no worse than pullman to tempe or BC to miami or minnesota to penn st. and that's pre-expansion. so let me address the teams one by one: i didn't mention texas. i don't think it's 100% lock that teams like A&M and oklahoma will end up in the same place as texas even though it's probably in those school's best interests to stay joined at the hip with the horns. texas is not coming to the SEC and while they say it's academics, it's not. if they came to the SEC their gravatational pull would not be as strong plain and simple and texas enjoys being texas. houston is just not strong enough athletically to put in the SEC. their market is big but i betcha i can find more aggies in houston than i can cougars. the east GT-seems like a great fit. they already have a rival in UGA, their academics wouldn't hurt and atlanta is already an unofficial SEC city anyway. let's just make it official. VT- look at a map, VT is just as close to knoxville approximately as vandy, UK, sc, and UGA. their fans would fit in great in the SEC. if i could add only one team to the east it'd be a coin flip btwn GT and VT for me. FSU- while i would actually like to see them in the SEC, i get a very anti SEC vibe from tallahassee. i just don't see them joining even though on many levels it makes sense. MIami- i could write a few sentences on this but just like the noles i don't think it will happen. i'd rather a USF than the canes. there, i said it. south florida- this school seems like the TCU of the east athletically. what USF has done in its short time in D-1 football is pretty remarkable. market, location, etc. they've got it. getting USF in the SEC would be like drafting a phenom prospect. Louisville- this one makes sense because hey the big east sucks. louisville and UK HATE each other and we get a team with a decent market, recent football success (relatively speaking), and an established basketball school. something the teams above sans GT fails to deliver. while i would like to see other teams besides louisville in the SEC this one seems like the easiest move. i'd be looking to get out of the big east if i had a chance. getting teams from the ACC might prove to be trickier. Clemson- I know it seems like a no brainer with clemson and its football rivalries traditionally with multiple teams from the SEC but their market and fan base doesn't bring as much to the table as other candidates. speaking of....if the other teams were candidates and the SEC was the island from LOST, clemson would be a Kwon. i'm not sayin i'm just sayin. ok let's face facts, the ACC and their teams might not be open to moving. i would be surprised if any ACC team made a move without a big 12 fire sale type of happening. BUT that brings us to.... the west the wild wild west. because the big 12 is on the verge of derailing like heidi and spencer's marriage (how's that for timely topical, b!tches!!??) The Wolf: We run across the path of any John Q. Laws, nobody does a f***ing thing unless I do it first. What did I just say? Jules: Don't do s*** unless. The Wolf: Unless what? Jules: Unless you do it first. The Wolf: Spoken like a true prodigy. Texas is the Wolf. at least as far as expansion in the SEC is concerned. the SEC isn't going to go after and big 12 north teams like the big ten. so what nebraska and mizzou does is irrelevant to the SEC. but what texas does is. and what those that hitch their wagon to UT is. if A&M and OU make it to where they have to be a package deal then you can take any hopes of having the aggies or sooners in the SEC. in fact the pac ten's willingness to invite them all makes it that much simpler for the schools. if the pac ten only invited say texas and colorado then we could really have some fun with this. texas a&m- they fit in well. bring in a very large school and fan base and a great market. already have rivalries with LSU and arky. without all the ties to UT, they would fit in great. i personally hate A&M but would love to rekindle the rivalry with them and think they make a natural end of the year game. of course even if UT and tamu go separate ways they would still play each other every year ooc. i mean all of tamu's existence is based on their penile envy of UT. of any of the schools we could add to the west, they are the best fit. oklahoma- who wouldn't want to add a football powerhouse like the sooners? but i think they go wherever texas goes even more than A&M. geographically they would be on the outside of the conf but hell right now LSU just as much is. TCU- you bring in the dallas market (well it's UT country but still) and a school much like USF has an up and coming football program. not sure how strong they are in other sports but i think TCU's addition to the SEC at this point would be more likely than UT A&M or OU. same with okie state, decent football and basketball programs. fan base is ok, without OU though they become less attractive. so before i post 5000 words lets go back to the options. option 1 was just adding two teams the most sense being one to east and one to west. either add a conf game and leave 3 ooc games a year or take away one of the eastern opponents annually. one of the more interesting scenarios would be if two teams are added from the same area say A&M and TCU to the west. or adding like louisville and USF to the east. then you may get to re-structure the divisions. adding two teams to the west might force a team like auburn to the east. or two teams to the east could send maybe like vandy to the west. that's just geographically speaking and taking nothing else into account for balance. so you could have: West Bama, Ole Miss, LSU, Miss ST, Arky, Texas A&M, TCU East: UF, UGA, Vandy, UK, SCe, Tenn, auburn. or something like West-Bama, Ole MIss, LSU, Miss St, Arky, Auburn, TCU East-Florida, Georgia, Vandy, UK, South Carolina, Tenn, Louisville or East- UF, UGA, UK, SCe, Tenn, Louisville, USF West-Bama, Auburn, LSU, Ole miss, miss st, arky, vanderbilt now where this gets really fun is Option 2. adding more than two teams (or really just 4). haven't we learned anything from the WAC and CUSA???? you would hope but let's say the SEC adds 4 teams. because now is where i get to some serious time wasting. realignment of the SEC. with 16 teams you could keep the east and west with 8 teams in each so something balanced like: East UF Tenn UGA UK Vandy SCe USF Louisville West LSU Bama Ole MIss Miss St Auburn Arkansas Texas A&M Oklahoma but that's waaaayyyyy too simple for me and making it that simple would force me to be productive so how about instead of two divisions we do 4 divisions of 4 teams each?? bear with me because look how pretty and neat this comes out with the addition of TCU, Louisville, Oklahoma, and A&M. so let's throw this in here as an example......... North Kentucky Tennessee Vandy Louisville East South Carolina Florida Georgia Auburn South LSU Bama Miss St Ole Miss West Arkansas TCU Oklahoma Texas A&M the biggest band aid to pull off in this scenario is the east-west traditional rivalries which honestly you and i both know affects 4 schools Tenn-Bama, UGA-AU. that's it. you think us or florida will boo hoo not playing each other??? you think ole miss and vandy will cry foul or state and UK??? c'mon!!! you play the teams in your division every year so LSU would play MSU-Bama-Ole Miss every year. and then you play two teams from every other division home and home. so LSU would play two teams from the East, West, and North every year and rotate after the two year cycle of home and home. that gives you 9 conf games and 3 ooc games every year. it's doable and what the PAC ten does now (9 conf games that is). so LSU's SEC schedule could look like this in a given year: Texas A&M Mississippi State @TCU Louisville @South Carolina @Tennessee Georgia @ Alabama Ole Miss btw, who wouldn't want to road trip it to dallas once every four years? or have purple and gold invade norman? good stuff. you could keep the SECcg the way it is and pit the teams with the best record in the south/west vs the team from the north/east. but i think a mini SEC tourney or plus one would be more fair and hey there look at that SEC, instead of cashing in on one game in atlanta cash in on 3 games. South champ vs West champ in Houston/N.O. rotate maybe? East champ vs North Champ in Nashville/Birmingham winners play for conf title in ATL. so you could have Florida vs Tennessee in Nashville Alabama vs Oklahoma in Houston winners to ATL after a team battles thru that, try to keep that team from the nat'l champ game if W-L's are comparable. you'd have no argument. of course the chance for the good teams to knock each other off probably increases but hey no system is perfect. except maybe the way the SEC has it now. but the hypotheticals are fun.
i just dont see oklahoma going anywhere without ok state going also. think it might be the same with tx and atm. so if adding just one to the west and one to the east, that leaves tcu or tx tech for the west, imo. i think tcu would be the better candidate of the two. selfishly, i wouldnt mind a game in ft worth every two years. if adding two to the east and two to the west, or two teams total and realigning the divisions, i would think either the combo of tx/atm, or ok/ok st. with the two tex teams being the better fit, imo.
the sec should use this as an opportunity to improve the academics of the conference, as a whole, and over time the current sec schools. the sec only has two good schools (V and UF with UGA just behind). evidently a major sticking point with UTx is the SECs subpar academics, so perhaps a package deal would work. get GaTech and Va to come on board if Tx and TxAM agree. then youd have 5-7 good schools in the conference and that would help the other schools to get better academically (ie, get more research $$$). 20 years from now, academically, the SEC could look more like the ACC than the B12.
too bad academics have to be involved... :hihi: and then of course longer seasons. adding a couple big-named schools would be nice, but maybe a couple smaller, but still competitive schools would be more ideal? idk, all of this is mind boggling to me. :huh:
With Nebraska expected to announce it's intentions to move to the Big -10, the implosion of the Big - 12 has begun. Watch as all of the domino's start to fall.
