College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

[Bob Gray]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

A&M and Baylor offer a pretty good package for the SEC:

- Texas TV markets and recruiting
- a cupcake for Ole Miss and Miss State

You get the first part by taking just A&M, and I don't they are that interested in the second part. Remember, this is the SEC. They are stuffed on cupcakes by the time the non-conference schedule is finished.

 

[blockski]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

The Big 12 is making a mistake giving Texas the lion's share of the revenue if this guy is to be believed.

It will only delay the inevitable, Texas will want more and more of a share of the revenue.

Then in 3-4 years the Big 12 will fall apart. Surely the other schools just have to understand that?

And for OK St and TT their piece of the pie was already bad and that's why they wanted out. Now they're going to give up more of the pie to satisfy UT?

My my my, have their fortunes changed.

I think they do realize that this would only delay the inevitable, but that would at least give them time to develop some contingency plans.

 

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

I think they do realize that this would only delay the inevitable, but that would at least give them time to develop some contingency plans.

There is no contingency plan, unless the Big 12 will bring in other powers into the conference.

 

[bigmrg74]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

A&M would be a great fit for the SEC should they be able to schedule Texas every year for a NC game. Joining the SEC would allow them to play their rivals LSU and Arkansas, and would greatly reduce traveling costs, not having to go to Arizona every year, or USC, Oregon, etc depending on the schedule.

Yeah, and hell, right now, the western division of the SEC is LSU, Arkansas, Old Miss, Mississippi State, Auburn and Alabama. Figure either Auburn or Alabama to go to the east division, with the understanding that the Iron Bowl will be played every year between the two. Or have them both move to the east and have Vandy go to the West. That leaves you LSU, Arkansas, Old Miss, Miss State and one of the Alabama schools or Vandy to go along with Texas A&M and Baylor. That would make the SEC west a nice little packed division that doesn't have a whole lot of crazy travel in it.

Plus, here's the additional bonus for Baylor. With going to the PAC with Texas, they get one, maybe 2 big draw games, and those would be every other year with Texas and whoever in Texas goes west with them. In the SEC, they would have to expand their stadium just for the visiting fans of the other schools that can't even get tickets at their stadium, but can swing a roadtrip to Waco. Maybe not so much for when the Far East schools like Georgia and Florida visit, as well, that is quite the haul, but they should still see a lot better number of visiting fans in the SEC than what they would in the PAC.

 

[bigmrg74]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

The problem with this scenario is that I just can't see the SEC having the slightest interest in Baylor. Baylor is one of the weaker links in the Big 12. I don't see any way the SEC takes Baylor over someone like Georgia Tech or Clemson or whoever they may raid from the ACC or elsewhere. A&M isn't a juicy enough target to take Baylor as part of the package.

A&M and Baylor offer a pretty good package for the SEC:

- Texas TV markets and recruiting
- a cupcake for Ole Miss and Miss State

You get the first part by taking just A&M, and I don't they are that interested in the second part. Remember, this is the SEC. They are stuffed on cupcakes by the time the non-conference schedule is finished.

Yeah, but hell, in these superconferences, you're still going to need teams you can beat. The SEC is pretty stacked as it is right now. Why add a Juggernaught like Texas when they could fairly easy get about as much of the Texas TV Market with A&M and Baylor, and with a little smart scheduling on Baylor's part as well. I don't know if Longhorn fans would really be lining up all the time to see them take on the Arizona's, Oregon's, Washington's and the Cali schools. If Texas has a night game or has a late game out on the coast, would be pretty easy for Baylor to schedual their home games at a time where most people in Texas could watch the Bears take on whatever SEC they face that week while they get ready for watching the Horns.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

Yeah, but hell, in these superconferences, you're still going to need teams you can beat. The SEC is pretty stacked as it is right now. Why add a Juggernaught like Texas when they could fairly easy get about as much of the Texas TV Market with A&M and Baylor, and with a little smart scheduling on Baylor's part as well. I don't know if Longhorn fans would really be lining up all the time to see them take on the Arizona's, Oregon's, Washington's and the Cali schools. If Texas has a night game or has a late game out on the coast, would be pretty easy for Baylor to schedual their home games at a time where most people in Texas could watch the Bears take on whatever SEC they face that week while they get ready for watching the Horns.

But you don't add a team that doesn't increase the quality of your league. The SEC is football-centric to the extreme, and I just don't see them wanting to add one of the weakest football programs in any of the major conferences. I can understand adding A&M because they add the Texas market and they are historically a good team at least sometimes. Adding Baylor probably helps a little more in the Texas market, but I just don't see them being a big draw across Texas. Maybe someone who knows the Texas market better can tell us if Baylor would be valuable to the SEC. I just don't see it.

 

[bigmrg74]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

But you don't add a team that doesn't increase the quality of your league. The SEC is football-centric to the extreme, and I just don't see them wanting to add one of the weakest football programs in any of the major conferences. I can understand adding A&M because they add the Texas market and they are historically a good team at least sometimes. Adding Baylor probably helps a little more in the Texas market, but I just don't see them being a big draw across Texas. Maybe someone who knows the Texas market better can tell us if Baylor would be valuable to the SEC. I just don't see it.

Baylor is going to be happy with whatever deal the SEC gives them, and does help the SEC round out some of their other sports as well, which would be good if they want to go to their own network as well. Texas, well, they're used to ruling the roost, and would likely want to make a lot of demands on the SEC, and in general be a pain in the *** to deal with knowing that they could pack up their bags at any time for the Big Ten or the PAC perhaps. Why deal with that headache and devil when you could have somebody who's going to be very loyal to the SEC, and gives you a slightly better team to beat up every year. Sure, they're Baylor, but in a few years they can point and say, well, they play in the SEC vs. a directional school from Louisiana.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

Baylor is going to be happy with whatever deal the SEC gives them, and does help the SEC round out some of their other sports as well, which would be good if they want to go to their own network as well. Texas, well, they're used to ruling the roost, and would likely want to make a lot of demands on the SEC, and in general be a pain in the *** to deal with knowing that they could pack up their bags at any time for the Big Ten or the PAC perhaps. Why deal with that headache and devil when you could have somebody who's going to be very loyal to the SEC, and gives you a slightly better team to beat up every year. Sure, they're Baylor, but in a few years they can point and say, well, they play in the SEC vs. a directional school from Louisiana.

Of course Baylor would be happy with whatever the SEC gave them, given that going to the SEC is a better scenario than Baylor could possibly imagine. If the Big 12 breaks up, Baylor from all reports is likely left out in the cold with Iowa State, etc. I don't think the SEC is interested in a really weak football school that could possibly round out some other sports. It's not like Baylor is some dynamo in every other sport or something, though they've had recent success in basketball. I haven't seen any reports that indicate Baylor is even in the mix at all for joining the SEC, which is something, given all the crazy scenarios that have floated around the last week or so.

Regarding Texas, the reports I've seen are that Texas isn't interested in the SEC, not the other way around. Texas might be a pain, but they'd bring more $$ to every SEC school. And this is driven primarily by $$. One of a number of stumbling blocks though is that Texas much prefers the Pac Ten over the SEC in the area of academics, and there's no way that's going to change anytime soon.

 

[Handyman]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

There is no contingency plan, unless the Big 12 will bring in other powers into the conference.

The contingency plan is that they will have a couple years to figure out where to go and strike a better deal. There is less of a hurry factor.

That the Big 12-2 is going to cater to Texas is just laughable and proves that their "leadership" is as gullible as has been hinted at. Assuming Texas stays this year, in 3 years they will jump ship for a better deal.

A&M should ditch them for the SEC and the Big 12-2 North should sign on with the Big 10 + 2 and the MWC and that way Texas can see what their arrogance got them

 

[bigmrg74]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

Of course Baylor would be happy with whatever the SEC gave them, given that going to the SEC is a better scenario than Baylor could possibly imagine. If the Big 12 breaks up, Baylor from all reports is likely left out in the cold with Iowa State, etc. I don't think the SEC is interested in a really weak football school that could possibly round out some other sports. It's not like Baylor is some dynamo in every other sport or something, though they've had recent success in basketball. I haven't seen any reports that indicate Baylor is even in the mix at all for joining the SEC, which is something, given all the crazy scenarios that have floated around the last week or so.

Regarding Texas, the reports I've seen are that Texas isn't interested in the SEC, not the other way around. Texas might be a pain, but they'd bring more $$ to every SEC school. And this is driven primarily by $$. One of a number of stumbling blocks though is that Texas much prefers the Pac Ten over the SEC in the area of academics, and there's no way that's going to change anytime soon.

Either way they slice it, the SEC will be making money just from having Texas A&M in the conference, and does give them an excuse to have Jerryworld bid on hosting the SEC championship game, which would then boost the bids from the Superdome and the Georgia Dome respectively to stay in the mix. Realistically, Adding Texas over Baylor would only give each of the current SEC schools another Million or so, and they're all turning a pretty penny right now?? Are they that hard up for cash to go after Texas and put up with the headaches that the Longhorns would give them, both in the AD meeting and for their poor Football Coaches as well. Adding Texas to the mix only makes it that much harder for schools like South Carolina, Kentucky, Old Miss, Miss State, Arkansas, Vandy and Tennessee to win the SEC and thus by default almost, earn an automatic birth into the BCS Bowl* Game that they award the big crystle football as the Bowl Trophy. *Not a Championship yet! You add Texas, and those schools would be lucky to ever earn a bid to the Cotton Bowl any more.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

Either way they slice it, the SEC will be making money just from having Texas A&M in the conference, and does give them an excuse to have Jerryworld bid on hosting the SEC championship game, which would then boost the bids from the Superdome and the Georgia Dome respectively to stay in the mix. Realistically, Adding Texas over Baylor would only give each of the current SEC schools another Million or so, and they're all turning a pretty penny right now?? Are they that hard up for cash to go after Texas and put up with the headaches that the Longhorns would give them, both in the AD meeting and for their poor Football Coaches as well. Adding Texas to the mix only makes it that much harder for schools like South Carolina, Kentucky, Old Miss, Miss State, Arkansas, Vandy and Tennessee to win the SEC and thus by default almost, earn an automatic birth into the BCS Bowl* Game that they award the big crystle football as the Bowl Trophy. *Not a Championship yet! You add Texas, and those schools would be lucky to ever earn a bid to the Cotton Bowl any more.

Wait, you're arguing that given the choice, the SEC would choose to take Baylor over Texas?

There's already plenty of drama and intrigue and ego in the SEC. Texas would fit right in. And you don't think another million dollars per school isn't something they'd be quite interested in? This is a moot discussion, as Texas isn't interested in the SEC from all indications, but Texas is miles more appealing to any of the surrounding major conferences than Baylor is. Texas is the biggest catch on the table, while Baylor is in comparison small fry. Don't get me wrong, I actually like Baylor and root for them, but they just don't bring a lot to the table when conference realignment is discussed.

 

[bigmrg74]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

Wait, you're arguing that given the choice, the SEC would choose to take Baylor over Texas?

There's already plenty of drama and intrigue and ego in the SEC. Texas would fit right in. And you don't think another million dollars per school isn't something they'd be quite interested in? This is a moot discussion, as Texas isn't interested in the SEC from all indications, but Texas is miles more appealing to any of the surrounding major conferences than Baylor is. Texas is the biggest catch on the table, while Baylor is in comparison small fry. Don't get me wrong, I actually like Baylor and root for them, but they just don't bring a lot to the table when conference realignment is discussed.

Texas, for all they bring to the table, brings a lot problems as well. And lets not forget, while the SEC doesn't mind making money, the number one thing to them is Winnin' dat dag gum football game and being number one. Texas in the SEC makes it harder for the other schools as well.

 

[BoomGoestheDynamite]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

Wait, you're arguing that given the choice, the SEC would choose to take Baylor over Texas?

There's already plenty of drama and intrigue and ego in the SEC. Texas would fit right in. And you don't think another million dollars per school isn't something they'd be quite interested in? This is a moot discussion, as Texas isn't interested in the SEC from all indications, but Texas is miles more appealing to any of the surrounding major conferences than Baylor is. Texas is the biggest catch on the table, while Baylor is in comparison small fry. Don't get me wrong, I actually like Baylor and root for them, but they just don't bring a lot to the table when conference realignment is discussed.

I agree. Outside of the "State" schools in the Big 12, Baylor is easily the least attractive candidate. They might not even beat out a KSU, ISU, or OSU. As everyone loves to point out, Baylor is in a BCS conference thanks mainly to a stroke of luck. There were no plans to bring them along until Anne Richards intervened. 15 years later the song remains the same.

One of my buddies who is an A&M alum says that the latest conspiracy theory on their board is that ESPN is planning to overbid for a Big 12 TV deal to prevent the Pac 16 and having to shell out serious dollars done the line. Seems like fool's gold to me, but there might be a political compromise that can be worked out.

 

[MinnesotaNorthStar]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

You get the first part by taking just A&M, and I don't they are that interested in the second part. Remember, this is the SEC. They are stuffed on cupcakes by the time the non-conference schedule is finished.

Are you new? Texas A&M will automatically become 10 times better just from joining the SEC!!!

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

I agree. Outside of the "State" schools in the Big 12, Baylor is easily the least attractive candidate. They might not even beat out a KSU, ISU, or OSU. As everyone loves to point out, Baylor is in a BCS conference thanks mainly to a stroke of luck. There were no plans to bring them along until Anne Richards intervened. 15 years later the song remains the same.

One of my buddies who is an A&M alum says that the latest conspiracy theory on their board is that ESPN is planning to overbid for a Big 12 TV deal to prevent the Pac 16 and having to shell out serious dollars done the line. Seems like fool's gold to me, but there might be a political compromise that can be worked out.

Anne Richards saved them once, but she's not around to save Baylor again.

 

[MountieBoyOz]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

I wonder if the Big XII is going to make a play for TCU and one other school. TCU would make perfect sense as an expansion candidate. They've been wanting a shot at the big time and this would be it.

I thought of SMU, but I don't think they would work. Houston or Rice could work.

Let me know what you think.

 

[Craig P.]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

Bob Bullock saved them once, but he's not around to save Baylor again.

FYP.

 

[BoomGoestheDynamite]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

Supposedly Larry Scott just confirmed that UT will not head west so the great conference musical chairs of 2010 may stop at 2, depending on what the Big 10 does. Apparently academics really weren't that big a deal to UT in this whole shebang.

 

[bronconick]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

For the Big XII to even be worthwhile, they have to add a couple teams to keep the title game, don't they? Or is literally everything going to Texas? If I were Oklahoma, I'd start to look elsewhere instead of sucking at Texas' *insert here* Oklahoma ought to be of equal interest to the SEC as an A&M, right? The Red River shootout isn't worth watching Texas suck up all the profits for your league.

 

[Kepler]

Re: College Football 2010: Dude, Where's my Conference?

Supposedly Larry Scott just confirmed that UT will not head west so the great conference musical chairs of 2010 may stop at 2, depending on what the Big 10 does. Apparently academics really weren't that big a deal to UT in this whole shebang.

Could it be that Texas might go to the Big 10 after all? If that were to happen, I could see Notre Dame running the numbers one last time and finally having the tumblers fall.

There's this to think of.

Visualize a conference with the top 4 programs in value. The SEC would finally have some competition.